Skip to content
naulon

Corrected on Feb 21, 2020.

Source: the publisher, via Crossref · checked Oct 21, 2026 · Read the notice

The yin and yang of co-inhibitory receptors: toward anti-tumor immunity without autoimmunity

Alexandra Schnell, Lloyd Bod, Asaf Madi and 1 more

Cell Research · 2020 · Review · CC BY

doi:10.1038/s41422-020-0277-x

Abstract

Co-inhibitory receptors are important regulators of T-cell function that define the balance between tolerance and autoimmunity. The immune regulatory function of co-inhibitory receptors, including CTLA-4, PD-1, TIM-3, TIGIT, and LAG-3, was first discovered in the setting of autoimmune disease models, in which their blockade or deficiency resulted in induction or exacerbation of the disease. Later on, co-inhibitory receptors on lymphocytes have also been found to influence outcomes in tumor and chronic viral infection settings. These receptors suppress T-cell function in the tumor microenvironment (TME), thereby making the T cells dysfunctional. Based on this observation, blockade of co-inhibitory receptors (also known as checkpoint molecules) has emerged as a successful treatment option for a number of human cancers. However, severe autoimmune-like side effects limit the use of therapeutics that block individual or combinations of co-inhibitory receptors for cancer treatment. In this review we provide an overview of the role of co-inhibitory receptors in autoimmunity and anti-tumor immunity. We then discuss current approaches and future directions to leverage our knowledge of co-inhibitory receptors to target them in tumor immunity without inducing autoimmunity.

Full text

From PubMed Central, U.S. National Library of Medicine, as current on Oct 21, 2026. Paragraph numbers are ours, so an answer can point at one.

Introduction

T cells constitute a very important and potent effector compartment of the immune system. Therefore, it is critical that T-cell responses are strictly regulated to avoid inappropriate immune responses, such as autoimmune reactions. Central tolerance in the thymus acts as the first control during T-cell development to eliminate autoreactive T-cell clones. The nuclear factor AIRE expressed in medullary thymic epithelial cells facilitates ectopic expression of tissue-restricted antigens in the thymus and thereby plays an important role in the negative selection of autoreactive T cells in the thymus., The striking autoimmune phenotype in AIRE-deficient mice indicates a dominant role for central tolerance in eliminating autoreactive T cells and thus preventing autoimmune reactions. However, in part due to lack of self-tissue antigen expression in the thymus, altered expression of self-antigens, or low affinity expression of self-antigens, some autoreactive T cells still manage to escape negative selection, leave the thymus and enter the peripheral immune repertoire. Hence, peripheral regulation of T-cell responses is crucial to prevent inappropriate responses to self-antigens. In the scope of this review we will focus on the role of T cell co-inhibitory molecules in the regulation of peripheral tolerance and autoimmunity, and their role in anti-tumor immunity.

Co-stimulatory and co-inhibitory receptors

The activation of naïve T cells requires both the stimulation of the T-cell receptor (TCR) by a major histocompatibility complex (MHC)-peptide complex (signal 1) and co-stimulatory signaling by co-stimulatory receptors (signal 2) with their corresponding ligands on antigen-presenting cells (APCs).– T cell co-signaling receptors are broadly defined as cell-surface receptors that positively (co-stimulatory) or negatively (co-inhibitory) regulate TCR driven signals and therefore T-cell activation. As T cell co-signaling receptors have a key role in T-cell biology by directing T-cell activation, expansion and differentiation and therefore T-cell fate, the expression of these co-receptors and their ligands are strictly regulated in T cells and in the tissue micro-environment. An important example of a co-stimulatory pathway is the CD28:B7 axis. The co-stimulatory receptor CD28 on T cells and its ligand B7-1 or B7-2 on activated APCs amplify TCR signaling, leading to T-cell proliferation and IL-2 production., To date, a number of co-stimulatory receptors have been identified including ICOS, CD226, OX-40, 4-1BB, and GITR. As T cells are being activated and expanded, the expression of co-inhibitory receptors is upregulated. Multiple co-inhibitory receptors have been identified including CTLA-4, PD-1, TIM-3, TIGIT, and LAG-3. Co-inhibitory receptors play an important role in several T-cell subsets including activated T cells, regulatory T cells, and exhausted T cells. In activated T cells, co-inhibitory receptors control and contract the expanded T-cell population. In regulatory T cells (Tregs), co-inhibitory receptors, such as CTLA-4 and PD-1, promote the suppressive function of Tregs., In the scope of this review, we are going to focus on the role of co-inhibitory receptors on exhausted T cells. Recent work identified a critical role of T-cell exhaustion in autoimmune diseases and the targeting of co-inhibitory receptors in cancer therapy has been shown to be limited due to the development of autoimmune-like immune-related adverse events (irAEs). We are therefore interested in discussing the function of co-inhibitory receptors on exhausted T cells in autoimmunity versus anti-tumor immunity and leverage the recent knowledge to improve immune checkpoint blockade therapy for cancer by avoiding the induction of autoimmunity.

T-cell exhaustion

T-cell exhaustion was originally discovered more than two decades ago, with the observation that virus-specific CD8+ T cells from mice with chronic LCMV infections lost the ability to produce effector cytokines and to mediate cytolytic effector functions. Loss of function during T-cell exhaustion occurs in a hierarchical manner over the course of chronic infection, with loss of both production of IL-2 and T-cell proliferation occurring early after infection., At later stages of T-cell exhaustion, virus-specific CD8+ T cells lose the ability to produce the cytokines IFNγ and TNFα, and to degranulate., An additional key property of exhausted CD8+ T cells is an impaired maintenance of T-cell memory, which is controlled by the expression of Foxo1. In contrast to memory CD8+ T cells during viral infections, exhausted CD8+ T cells respond poorly to the cytokines IL-7 and IL-15 and are not maintained after transfer into virus-free recipient mice.,, Although best characterized in CD8+ T cells, CD4+ T cells also develop T-cell exhaustion and may play a crucial part in promoting and sustaining T-cell exhaustion in CD8+ T cells.– Genomic methods including RNA-sequencing and ATAC-sequencing have been used to analyze the molecular pathways underlying T-cell exhaustion., These approaches allowed the identification of a molecular phenotype specific for exhausted T cells, characterizing them as a distinct state of T-cell differentiation, which differs from T-cell activation or memory. The exhaustion-specific molecular changes observed in CD8+ T cells include altered metabolism, chemokine and chemokine receptor expression, and cytokine signaling pathways., In addition, a well-defined characteristic of exhausted CD4+ and CD8+ T cells from both human and animal models is an elevated expression of co-inhibitory receptors., Functional studies have shown an important role for inhibitory receptors in T-cell exhaustion. For example, signaling of the inhibitory receptor PD-1 following binding to its ligand PD-L1 induces T-cell exhaustion, and blocking this pathway during chronic LCMV infection restores virus-specific CD8+ T-cell responses by inducing proliferation and cytokine secretion and reduction of viral load.– Furthermore, blockade of the PD-1 pathway during chronic simian immunodeficiency virus infection induces rapid expansion of virus-specific CD8+ T cells with enhanced effector function resulting in improved survival.

Importantly, exhaustion has been associated with the clinical outcomes for multiple human diseases. Exhaustion correlates with persistent viraemia in a number of chronic viral infections including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C and B virus (HCV and HBV).– Interestingly, T-cell exhaustion also plays an important role in cancer and autoimmunity, albeit in opposite ways, in that T-cell exhaustion has been correlated with poor immune responses to tumors in patients and with a better prognosis in patients with autoimmune diseases, (Fig. 1).

T cells in autoimmunity

IFNγ-producing CD4+ T cells (Th1) and IL-17-producing CD4+ T cells (Th17 cells) have specifically been implicated in the development of organ-specific autoimmunity. Originally several observations supported Th1 cells as the pathogenic subset in T cell-driven autoimmune diseases. Adoptive transfer of Th1 cells induces experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE) with the Th1 cytokine IFNγ being present in CNS lesions during EAE peak and decreased during disease remission.– Mice deficient for the major Th1 transcription factors, T-bet and STAT-4, show resistance to EAE., Furthermore, administration of the Th1-differentiating cytokine IL-12 aggravates collagen-induced arthritis (CIA). However, loss of the Th1-signature cytokine IFNγ or STAT-1, the transcription factor that mediates IFNγ signaling, did not inhibit the development of autoimmunity, but paradoxically enhanced autoimmune disease.,, This led to the hypothesis that there might be another subset of T cells driving the development of autoimmunity and tissue inflammation. As IL-17 was found to be increased in mouse and human organ-specific autoimmune diseases, including multiple sclerosis (MS), rheumatoid arthritis, and psoriasis, research focused on the role of IL-17 producing T cells (named Th17 cells) as potential drivers of autoimmunity.– Indeed, we and others have shown a potent role for Th17 cells in tissue inflammation and autoimmunity in multiple disease contexts. Th17 cells were shown to be differentiated in the presence of TGFβ and IL-6 and further expanded or maintained by the cytokines IL-1 and IL-23.– Loss of any of the cytokines (IL-6, IL-1, IL-23) resulted in inhibition of the development of autoimmunity.– Moreover, differentiation of Th17 cells in the presence of IL-23 induces more severe EAE. It is important to note, however, that Th1 and Th17 cells are non-mutually exclusive cell fates. IFNγ and IL-17 double-positive cells have been observed in the CNS during EAE and fate mapping of IL-17 producing T cells has revealed Th17 cell plasticity to an IFNγ+ Th1-like phenotype.– Future studies are needed to further elucidate the function of the Th17/Th1 plasticity in the pathogenesis of autoimmune diseases.

Understanding the role of T cells in autoimmunity has led to the successful development of agents for the treatment of organ-specific autoimmune diseases. Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) blocking IL-17A, secukinumab and ixekizumab, are approved for the treatment of psoriasis and secukinumab is also approved for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis and spondyloarthropathies. Similarly, drugs targeting the proinflammatory cytokine TNFα (infliximab, etanercept, adalimumab) have been approved for the treatment of multiple human autoimmune diseases including rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn’s disease, and ankylosing spondylitis.

However, current therapies targeting cytokines and/or cytokine signaling are not efficacious in all patients with autoimmune disease. Rather each agent must be tested in each disease, and typically not all patients diagnosed with a particular disease respond to treatment. Therefore, there is a need for the development of novel therapeutic approaches that will impact a common critical point that will enable efficacy in more patients and across diverse autoimmune diseases. One potential approach is to promote T-cell exhaustion by regulating expression or function of “checkpoint” molecules in autoimmune diseases.

T-cell exhaustion in autoimmunity

To identify predictive biomarkers linked to clinical outcome and novel therapeutic targets in autoimmune patients, McKinney et al. undertook an unbiased genomic analysis of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells from patients suffering from various autoimmune diseases. The authors demonstrated that the level of T-cell exhaustion in autoimmune patients was strongly correlated with their clinical outcomes. Using independent cohorts of patients suffering from the autoimmune diseases anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibody-associated vasculitis (AAV), SLE, and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), they found that for all three diseases, the T-cell exhaustion signature predicted a favorable clinical outcome. Hence, whereas T-cell exhaustion during chronic viral infections correlates with persistent viremia and worse clinical outcome, in autoimmune diseases the effect is opposite in that T-cell exhaustion seems to predict a better clinical outcome.

Additional data suggesting an important role for T-cell exhaustion in maintaining tolerance and preventing of autoimmunity has recently emerged following blockade of co-inhibitory molecules to promote anti-tumor immunity. The blockade of PD-1 and CTLA-4 with mAbs in cancer patients often leads to severe irAEs in multiple tissues, including the skin, intestine, liver and lung, (Fig. 2). These irAEs present pathologically like autoimmune diseases, and therefore support the concept that co-inhibitory receptors maintain peripheral tolerance, thereby preventing inappropriate autoimmune tissue inflammation.

Whereas the link between T-cell exhaustion and clinical outcomes in human autoimmunity has emerged only recently, the role of co-inhibitory molecules in autoimmune disorders has long been appreciated. In the following part of this review we will summarize the main findings highlighting the role of the co-inhibitory receptors CTLA-4, PD-1, TIM-3, TIGIT, and LAG-3 in autoimmune pathology.

Co-inhibitory receptors on T cells in autoimmunity: a focus on CTLA-4, PD-1, TIM-3, TIGIT and LAG-3

The study of T cell co-inhibitory receptors began with the discovery of cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4, CD152) in 1987 as a receptor for B7 with high sequence similarity to CD28., However in contrast to CD28, CTLA-4 was found to act as a negative regulator of T-cell activation by binding to the same ligands as the co-stimulatory molecule CD28, B7-1 and B7-2, but with much higher affinity.– Blockade of CTLA-4 in vitro and in vivo enhanced T-cell proliferation and effector functions., The subsequent generation of CTLA-4-deficient mice set the stage for the discovery of the important inhibitory function of CTLA-4 in autoimmunity. Mice with germline deletion of CTLA-4 developed lethal autoimmunity characterized by lymphoblast infiltration into liver, heart, lung, and pancreas and death by 3 to 4 weeks of age., Deletion of CTLA-4 in adult mice led to spontaneous lymphoproliferation and non-lethal autoimmune disease in multiple organs. Moreover, in vivo blockade of CTLA-4 signaling was shown to exacerbate disease in multiple murine autoimmune models. For example, administration of blocking anti-CTLA-4 mAb into young diabetes-susceptible mice (BDC2.5/NOD mice) provoked rapid onset of diabetes. Furthermore, in relapsing-remitting EAE, treatment with anti-CTLA-4 mAbs enhanced disease. However, it is important to note that in contrast to the germline deletion, CTLA-4 deficiency in adulthood leads to the protection from EAE., These paradoxical observations can be explained by compensatory immunosuppressive mechanisms following CTLA-4 deletion and an inhibitory role of CTLA-4 on Treg cells. Deletion of CTLA-4 in adult T cells led to the upregulation of inhibitory molecules including IL-10, LAG-3, and PD-1. Furthermore, the deletion of CTLA-4 specifically on Treg cells was necessary and sufficient to mediate EAE protection.

In humans, in addition to the full-length form of CTLA-4 (flCTLA-4), a soluble form of CTLA-4 exists (sCTLA-4) that lacks the transmembrane domain encoded by exon 3., Interestingly, sCTLA-4 has been associated with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Indeed, T1D disease susceptibility mapped to an allelic variation in the 3’ noncoding region of CTLA-4 correlates with mRNA expression of sCTLA-4. However, in NOD mice, a mouse model for T1D, disease susceptibility correlates with differential expression of a different CTLA-4 splice variant, ligand-independent CTLA-4 (liCTLA-4), that lacks the B7-1/B7-2 binding domain., LiCTLA-4 was shown to be a potent inhibitor of T-cell proliferation and cytokine secretion. These different variants might occur differentially depending on the autoimmune settings, affecting the tolerance mechanisms involved.

In 1992, the second co-inhibitory receptor programmed death-1 (PD-1, CD279) was discovered and was shown to express both ITIM and ITSM signaling motifs. Like CTLA-4, PD1 is an inhibitory receptor on T cells that mediates its inhibitory signals via its ligands PD-L1 (B7-H1, CD274) and PD-L2 (B7-DC, CD273). PD-1 is expressed on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, B cells, monocytes, and subsets of dendritic cells (DCs). Whereas PD-L1 is broadly expressed on hematopoietic and non-hematopoietic parenchymal tissue cells, PD-L2 is only expressed on DCs and some subsets of myeloid cells. Studying PD-1 deficiency in autoimmune disease mouse models has elucidated an important role for the PD-1 pathway in autoimmune diseases. Germline deletion of PD-1 results in development of severe autoimmune disease. Whereas BALB/c PD-1−/− mice develop lethal dilated cardiomyopathy, deletion of PD-1 in C57BL/6 mice results in spontaneous lupus-like autoimmune disease., T1D-prone NOD mice that are deficient for PD-1 have accelerated diabetes onset and an increased incidence of diabetes. Furthermore, blockade of PD-1 in EAE results in accelerated and more severe disease progression, with an increased infiltration of mononuclear cells into the CNS. Polymorphisms in the PD-1 locus in humans have been associated with SLE, T1D, ankylosing spondylitis, and rheumatoid arthritis.–

The co-inhibitory receptor T cell immunoglobulin and mucin-domain containing protein-3 (TIM-3) was originally discovered in our laboratory as a surface protein specifically expressed on Th1 cells and IFNγ-producing CD8+ T cells. As Th1 cells are established drivers of autoimmune disease, the function of TIM-3 was first studied in models of autoimmunity and it became apparent that TIM-3 mediates a potent inhibitory function. TIM-3 is expressed on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, NK cells, and myeloid cells, such as DCs and monocytes. The C-type lectin galectin-9 was the first ligand identified for TIM-3. Subsequently, several other ligands of TIM-3 have been identified, including phosphatidylserine and CEACAM1., Administration of anti-TIM-3 antibodies in EAE results in enhanced clinical and pathological disease scores with an increased activation phenotype in macrophages. Blockade of TIM-3 signaling in 2,4,6-trinitrobenzene sulfonic acid (TNBS)-induced colitis exacerbates disease, as shown by enhanced weight loss and tissue injury. Moreover, TIM-3 pathway blockade was observed to accelerate autoimmune diabetes. In addition to the results from murine autoimmune models, multiple studies also indicated an important role for TIM-3 in human autoimmune diseases. Hafler and colleagues first showed that T-cell clones generated from the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of MS patients produce high levels of IFNγ but show decreased expression of TIM-3 compared to clones from control subjects. Interestingly, treatment with IFNβ, an FDA-approved drug for MS, restored TIM-3 expression and lessened disease activity. Similarly, a number of studies have shown that reductions in TIM-3 expression on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells are inversely correlated with disease activity in patients with other autoimmune diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative colitis and psoriasis.– In rheumatoid arthritis patients, TIM-3 expression is inversely correlated with disease activity and plasma TNFα levels. Following treatment, TIM-3 expression increases and is associated with disease remission. In addition to Th1 cells, Th17 cells have been shown to express TIM-3, but at a lower level than on Th1 cells. In patients with psoriasis, TIM-3-negative Th1 and Th17 cells are increased in the peripheral blood, suggesting that impaired TIM-3 expression allows Th17 and Th1 cells to escape from TIM-3-mediated immunoregulation and thereby mediate disease. Together, these studies indicate that manipulating TIM-3 signaling in vivo may be a valuable tool in the treatment of autoimmunity. In addition to these polygenic autoimmune diseases, a recent study identified germline TIM-3 mutations in patients with subcutaneous panniculitis-like T-cell lymphoma (SPTCL). The mutations lead to misfolding of TIM-3 so that the protein is retained intracellularly with loss of cell surface expression. Patients harboring such loss of function mutations present with a severe autoinflammatory disease with high levels of IL-1 and TNFα in the serum and CD8+ T cells forming lymphomas around subcutaneous fat pads. About 30% of these patients develop autoimmune lupus-like disease characterized by elevated production of antibodies directed to double-stranded DNA. Furthermore, polymorphisms in the TIM-3 locus have been associated with multiple human autoimmune disorders.

Another co-inhibitory molecule, T cell immunoglobulin and ITIM domain (TIGIT) was discovered as a novel member of the CD28 protein family that is specifically expressed on immune cells. TIGIT is expressed on activated T cells, a subset of Treg cells and Tfh cells, and NK cells.,– TIGIT signals via two ligands, CD155 (PVR) and CD112 (PVRL2), that are expressed on APCs, T cells, and some non-hematopoietic cells.,, Interestingly, in tumors (murine and human) both immune cells and tumor cells express high levels of TIGIT ligands. The biological function of TIGIT was initially investigated in models of autoimmunity. Mice deficient for TIGIT did not display spontaneous autoimmunity. However, the loss of TIGIT led to exacerbated autoimmune disease after immunization, or when TIGIT-deficient mice were crossed to an appropriate auto-reactive T-cell mouse line. TIGIT-deficient mice are highly susceptible to actively-induced EAE with enhanced T-cell infiltration into the CNS and increased pro-inflammatory cytokine levels. Furthermore, TIGIT-deficient mice crossed to the 2D2 MOG-specific TCR transgenic mice display spontaneous atypical EAE. Additionally, TIGIT was also found to have a protective function in CIA. Administration of TIGIT-blocking antibodies resulted in accelerated disease onset of CIA. Collectively, these data suggest an inhibitory function of TIGIT on T cells in murine autoimmune models. CD226 binds to the same ligands as TIGIT, but in contrast to TIGIT, mediates a positive co-stimulatory signal, forming a network similar to the B7:CD28:CTLA4 co-stimulatory molecules. Interestingly, genome-wide association studies have linked a polymorphism in CD226 to multiple human autoimmune diseases including MS and T1D, suggesting that the TIGIT:CD226 pathway may also play a role in human autoimmunity.,

The co-inhibitory receptor lymphocyte activation gene-3 (LAG-3) was discovered as a receptor expressed on activated T cells and a subset of NK cells. Interestingly, the structure of LAG-3 resembles the CD4 receptor and, in fact, LAG-3 binds to MHC class II with a higher affinity than CD4. In addition to MHC class II, the DC-SIGN family member LSECtin and the liver-secreted protein FGL1 have been identified as ligands of LAG-3., In contrast to mice deficient in other co-inhibitory receptors, such as CTLA-4 and PD-1, mice deficient for LAG-3 are not susceptible to autoimmunity unless bred to a permissive genetic background. LAG-3 deficiency in B6.SJL mice results in higher susceptibility to Hg-induced autoimmunity. In addition, NOD mice deficient for LAG-3 display accelerated T1D with 100% incidence. Interestingly, the NOD LAG3−/− mice exhibit increased T-cell numbers and enhanced proliferation of T cells in the islets, suggesting an inhibitory role for LAG-3 on T cells.

Understanding how co-inhibitory receptors are individually and collectively induced and involved in the establishment of the T-cell exhaustion state in autoimmunity would be a corner stone for their manipulation in the clinic.

Therapeutic induction of exhaustion in autoimmune diseases

As T-cell exhaustion correlates with a poor outcome in cancer patients, there has been a considerable interest in targeting T-cell exhaustion to enhance immune responses to cancer cells. Targeting T-cell exhaustion using PD-1 blocking antibodies is a proof of concept that blockade of co-inhibitory receptors can restore a functional T-cell response. As mentioned earlier, in contrast to cancer, multiple lines of evidence suggest a beneficial role for T-cell exhaustion in restraining autoimmune responses, in that deficiency or blockade of inhibitory receptors results in the development of autoimmunity in mice, and induction of autoimmunity is observed in humans during immune checkpoint blockade therapy for cancer. Additionally, a transcriptional signature of T-cell exhaustion is associated with a favorable clinical outcome in multiple human autoimmune diseases. Based on these data, promoting T-cell exhaustion could be beneficial in autoimmunity, and provides a novel therapeutic approach for inhibiting autoimmunity, (Fig. 3 and Table 1). Agonist antibodies and Fc-fusion proteins that engage co-inhibitory receptors have been successful in treating murine models of autoimmunity. For example, cells from the draining lymph nodes of mice treated with agonistic anti-TIGIT antibodies showed reduced cell proliferation and proinflammatory cytokine production after restimulation with MOG-peptide. Moreover, the severity of EAE was reduced in treated mice accompanied by decreased frequencies of IL-17-producing lymphocytes in the CNS. The administration of PDL-1.Fc to crosslink PD-1 ameliorated the severity of CIA, which was accompanied by decreased proliferation of T cells. Furthermore, administration of the TIM-3 ligand Galectin-9 decreased CIA severity. However, these studies did not prove that the agonistic agents directly induce signaling through the co-inhibitory receptors. Hence, future mechanistic studies will be required for translating the use of compounds triggering co-inhibitory receptors for the treatment of autoimmune diseases to the human setting.

Moreover, in order to facilitate the induction of T-cell exhaustion as therapy for human autoimmune diseases, a better understanding of the underlying biology of T-cell exhaustion is required. In a recent study, our laboratory used unbiased RNA and protein expression profiling to identify a module of co-inhibitory receptors in CD4+ and CD8+ T cells. Interestingly, our studies identified the immunoregulatory cytokine IL-27 as a key inducer of the co-inhibitory gene module. In addition, the transcription factors PRDM1 and c-MAF, induced by IL-27, were identified as cooperative regulators of the co-inhibitory gene module. Loss of both PRDM1 and c-MAF resulted in an about 2-fold decrease in expression of the co-inhibitory genes accompanied by increased anti-tumor immunity. Additional studies using novel unbiased computational methods are going to be required in the future to identify and test mediators of T-cell exhaustion in the treatment of autoimmune diseases. Furthermore, a better analysis of the tissue-specific molecular and cellular pathways inducing T-cell exhaustion remains mandatory in order to improve its targeting.

T cells in tumor immunity

Historically, cancer research has been dominated by a tumor-centric view, deciphering intrinsic features of tumor cells. However, Ehrlich’s theories, Coley’s clinical observations and experimental studies from Macfarlane Burnet and Lewis Thomas provided a strong rationale for cancer immunosurveillance.– In recent years, the concept of tumor cells interacting with the immune system and other cell types has become the focus of a number of studies. Among the cell types composing the TME, T cells have gained the most attention in cancer research. Tumor cells harboring genetic alterations differ from normal cells and are able to induce tumor-reactive T-cell responses.– During the T-cell response to cancer, tumor antigen-experienced lymphocytes undergo activation and differentiation into effector and memory fates.– Heterogeneity among these two cell fates has been demonstrated, with the description of multiple effector and memory subsets.– T cells are present in the TME of most solid tumors and it is well established that infiltration of T cells, particularly CD8+ T cells, correlates with a positive clinical outcome in several cancer types., CD4+ T cells have the ability to engage various differentiation pathways including the Th1-type pathway that may have a direct anti-tumor role via the secretion of IFNγ or TNFα. However, the most notable effect of CD4+ T cells is to provide help to expand and differentiate CD8+ T cells into cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs). With the help of DCs, CD8+ T cells are able to recognize and lyse tumor cells via the duo granzyme B/perforin, FasL and TRAIL molecules. However, as described above in chronic infections and cancer, a significant fraction of antigen-specific CD8+ T cells attain a hypo-responsive state called T-cell “exhaustion”.

T-cell exhaustion in tumor immunity

T-cell exhaustion was a term first coined in the context of chronic viral infection, as a state of dysfunctional phenotype where T cells progressively lose their effector function due to chronic antigen exposure, further promoted by a lack of CD4+ T-cell help and exposure to immunosuppressive cytokines., This concept expanded to the field of cancer research due to high tumor-antigen loads and the tolerogenic TME. T cells isolated from human tumors or murine models were initially described as phenotypically and functionally similar to exhausted T cells described in chronic infections, however there might be nuanced differences between those exhausted T cells found in chronic viral infections and the ones found in the TME., However, for the purpose of this review the dysfunctional T cells found in TME will be referred to as exhausted T cells. Exhausted T cells are characterized as a fraction of tumor-reactive CD8+ T cells that are unable to lyse tumor cells, and have impaired effector functions including production of potent effector cytokines (e.g., TNFα, IFNγ, IL-2) together with high expression of co-inhibitory receptors including CTLA-4, PD-1, TIM-3, TIGIT or LAG-3.,,, More recently, there has been an increasing focus on the transcriptional regulators that initiate, amplify or maintain the exhaustion state. Singer et al. have identified different gene programs regulating CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) dysfunction. The zinc-finger transcription factor GATA-3 was highlighted to be one of the drivers of the dysfunctional state in those cells., A recent publication by Vodnala et al. showed that the TME nutrients and metabolites milieu, especially potassium concentrations, impact the T-cell genome and epigenome, triggering T-cell stemness. Moreover, the exhaustion-fate commitment of CD8+ T cells has been recently attributed to the expression of the HMG-box transcription factor TOX, which appears to be critical for initiating the exhaustion epigenetic program in both chronic viral infections and cancer.– Dissecting the exhaustion state and transcriptional program remains essential in order to improve the identification and targeting of exhausted T cells in cancer. Expression of inhibitory receptors present on the surface of exhausted T cells form a functional module which is tightly controlled within the TME., In line with the previous section regarding the role of checkpoint receptors in autoimmunity, we will explore several inhibitory receptors and will highlight rationale, mechanisms and recent advances from both experimental models and clinical data emphasizing the value of those receptors as potential targets to manipulate for cancer therapy.

Co-inhibitory receptors on T cells in anti-tumor immunity: a focus on CTLA-4, PD-1, TIM-3, TIGIT and LAG-3

Promptly after their discovery, investigations aiming to target co-inhibitory receptors arose and established a new paradigm in therapies for cancer. As previously described, CTLA-4 acts as a brake on T-cell responses. In cancer, CTLA-4 is expressed on activated CD4+ and CD8+ T cells and on Treg cells.,, CTLA-4 can also be expressed by tumor cells themselves. Unfortunately, the rapid and fatal autoimmunity in CTLA-4-deficient mice limits the analysis of experimental tumor models., Interestingly, the inducible deletion of CTLA-4 expression in adult mice has no effect on the growth of MC38 colon adenocarcinoma cells in vivo, raising questions regarding the mechanisms involved in CTLA-4 targeting therapies. The first evidence that fostered enthusiasm in the field was the in vivo blockade of CTLA-4, published in 1996, leading to a remarkable control of tumor growth in mice. Notably, anti-CTLA-4 treatment restored exhausted T-cell effector functions, but the therapeutic effect was mainly due to the Fc-dependent depletion of Tregs occurring after anti-CTLA-4 administration.– Moreover, conditional deletion of CTLA-4 specifically in Tregs revealed important insights into their ability to promote tumor growth. In human cancer, several studies have described a negative correlation between the levels of CTLA-4 mRNA or protein and the clinical outcome in both leukemic and solid tumors.– Interestingly, in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), high CTLA-4 expression in primary tumors predicts an improved patient survival, whereas its expression in the sentinel lymph node correlates with a poor clinical outcome. Multiple studies identified SNPs within the CTLA-4 locus associated with various effects on cancer outcome. In particular, some SNPs in the promoter region of the CTLA-4 locus that regulate its expression, have been associated with higher susceptibility to pancreatic cancer or breast cancer., These data pave the way for improved personalized medicine with a deeper screening of these variants allowing the adjustment of targeted therapies.

PD-1 was initially identified as a receptor on T cells associated with programmed cell death. Further studies led to evidence for its role in anti-tumor immune responses. Its ligands, PD-L1 and PD-L2 expressed on various tumors and myeloid cells, dampen anti-tumor immune responses.– Interestingly, tumor-derived PD-L1 is sufficient to directly inhibit CD8+ T cells, thereby promoting tumor escape. Moreover, blockade, germline knockout or specific deletion of PD-1 in T cells leads to accelerated tumor clearance in multiple mouse models.– In several types of cancer, the expression of PD-1 and/or its ligands is elevated and has been associated with poor prognosis and is predictive of response to antibodies targeting the PD-1 pathway., Several studies have also identified PD-1 polymorphisms and their association with susceptibility to various cancer types. These studies have led to the successful therapeutic targeting of CTLA-4 and PD-1 for various malignancies.

Beyond these two receptors, preclinical data support a role for three other co-inhibitory receptors, TIM-3, TIGIT, and LAG-3, in cancer. Expression and function of TIM-3 was rapidly deciphered in cancer biology, due to its role in the regulation of type 1 immune responses.,,– TIM-3 was found to be highly expressed by CD8+ PD-1+ T cells which include the most dysfunctional subset of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in tumors., TIM-3 overexpression on T cells leads to the expansion of myeloid-derived suppressor cells and promotes tumor growth. In contrast, the blockade of TIM-3 reduces tumor growth and ameliorates tumor-specific CD8+ T-cell responses., High TIM-3 expression was shown to be associated with a poor prognosis in multiple human cancers such as colon, gastric, non-small cell lung, and clear cell renal carcinoma. In human colorectal cancer patients, high TIM-3 concentration correlates with disease progression. Several TIM-3 polymorphisms have been reported to be associated with a higher risk of digestive cancer, renal cell carcinoma, pancreatic cancer and non-small cell lung cancer.– At least 9 different clinical trials investigating TIM-3 inhibition in solid tumors show promising results, especially in combination with PD-1 blockade(Clintrials.gov).

TIGIT is highly expressed on NK cells, CD8+ T cells and Treg cells within the TME.– Its ligands CD155 and CD112 are widely expressed on tumor cells.– Multiple studies showed that TIGIT signaling is involved in dampening both T-cell activation and differentiation into anti-tumor effector cells. Interestingly, the majority of tumor-infiltrating Tregs expresses TIGIT, and TIGIT-deficient Tregs, but not CD8+ T cells, are able to reduce tumor growth in vivo. More recently, blocking anti-TIGIT antibodies synergized with anti-PD-1 treatment leading to tumor regression in vivo., In cancer patients, TIGIT expression has been associated with a poor clinical outcome in liquid or solid tumors.– Currently, a number of clinical studies are investigating the therapeutic impact of TIGIT blockade either alone or in combination with PD-1 in multiple cancer types.,,

The checkpoint receptor LAG-3 holds great potential in cancer immunotherapy. LAG-3 is expressed widely in tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in various tumors.– Initially described to modulate anti-tumor cell cytotoxicity in vitro,– the blockade or germline deletion of LAG-3 reduces the growth of transplantable tumors in vivo. Remarkably, LAG-3 synergizes strongly with PD-1 to promote tumor progression.– Ongoing investigations are highlighting new ligands for LAG-3 (e.g., galectin-3 or Fibrinogen-like protein 1) that are present in the TME together with novel immunomodulatory functions that will consolidate the basis for future therapeutic development of LAG-3 targeting reagents. Particularly, the high affinity interaction of Fibrinogen-like protein 1 (FGL1) and LAG-3 has revealed a major immune-evasion mechanism suppressing T cell anti-tumor responses and may constitute an important targetable pathway in cancer immunotherapy. A comprehensive appreciation of the receptor-ligand interactions and their biology remains essential for an optimal therapeutic targeting in clinic.

Checkpoint blockade-based immunotherapy

Based on initial studies on mouse tumors, anti-CTLA-4 antibodies were tested in clinical trials for human cancers. In 2010, targeting CTLA-4 pioneered checkpoint blockade-based immunotherapy by improving the survival of patients with metastatic melanoma. A year after the publication of the clinical trial, anti-CTLA-4 immunotherapy was approved by the FDA for advanced melanoma, paving the way for targeting of other checkpoint receptors such as PD-1 in 2014. However, the response rate of patients to these monotherapies remained modest. For example, in patients with metastatic melanoma, the objective response rate (ORR) for ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) was about 10%–16% and for nivolumab (anti-PD-1) was 30%–40%. Combinations of agents targeting CTLA-4 and PD-1 were thus investigated to increase the ORR and survival rates of patients. Indeed, in several studies, combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab increased the ORR to about 60% in various cancers,– reaching 90% ORR in melanoma., However, some tumors were refractory or acquired tumor-resistance to these therapies preventing clinical success. Furthermore, a significant fraction of patients developed severe irAEs, especially with combined CTLA-4 and PD-1 blockade, increasing the clinical need to optimize these therapies. Multiple investigations of optimized therapies (combination with other therapies, treatment kinetics, specificity, various Ig-isotypes or Fc-engineered antibodies) aim to improve the efficacy while mitigating the toxicity of anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA-4 antibodies.– Interestingly, a recent study showed that in combination with vaccines against tumor-associated antigens, the timing of anti-PD-1 blockade influences therapeutic outcome. Particularly, PD-1 blockade under suboptimal priming conditions leads to the emergence of a subset of dysfunctional CD8+ T cells that prevent antitumor immunity. However, these observations have catalyzed exploration into novel co-inhibitory molecules expressed on exhausted T cells with the goal of identifying receptors with more tumor-restricted expression to achieve increased efficacy while limiting autoimmune-like toxicity. Multiple clinical trials are currently investigating the use of TIM-3, TIGIT and LAG-3 as targets for monotherapy or in combination with anti-PD-1 and have shown promise for cancer therapy,,, (Fig. 3 and Table 1).

Checkpoint-inhibitor induced immune-related adverse events (irAEs)

As mentioned above, perturbing immune exhaustion or tolerance can provoke inappropriate autoimmune reactions (Fig. 2). Following checkpoint blockade, these overexuberant responses lead to irAEs, which could derive from: 1. an aggravation of a silent pre-existing autoimmune condition,; 2. a neo-autoimmune or inflammatory disorder because of breaking self-tolerance; 3. a disruption of immune homeostasis in tissues; 4. a bystander self-tissue damage (on target/off tumor responses); or 5. undesired reactions to the checkpoint blockade (e.g., expression of co-inhibitory molecules on non-T cells). The most common irAEs after checkpoint blockade are dermatologic (47%–65%), colitis (30%–48%), hepatitis (5%–30%) and/or endocrine (5%–10%) with different grades of severity., Interestingly, irAEs are more frequent in cancer patients upon anti-CTLA-4 (60%–85%, mostly grades 1 and 2) than anti-PD-1 (16%–37%, with a minority of patients displaying high-grade toxicity) blockades.,– Environmental factors have been shown to influence the occurrence of irAEs. For example, the microbiome has been shown to affect efficacy and immunotoxicity of checkpoint blockade. Dysbiosis induced by antibiotics was revealed to negatively impact on the clinical outcome of cancer patients who were treated with checkpoint blockade therapies.– Additional factors found to influence susceptibility to irAEs include the patients’ genetics/epigenetics and autoimmunity related to variants in the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) locus. A careful establishment of a risk score specific to each immunotherapy may provide important insights that can be used by clinicians to improve immunotherapeutic strategies while limiting irAEs.

Toward tumor immunity without autoimmunity

Despite the impressive efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade in the treatment of some cancers, the manifestation of autoimmune disease-like irAEs has become a critical limitation for the applicability of these drugs in clinic. Additionally, many patients fail to respond to current checkpoint blockade therapies. Current and future efforts in the field are directed toward promoting tumor-specific immunity with greater efficacy in more clinical settings with more tolerable side effects (Fig. 2).

Shared features of exhausted tumor-infiltrating T cells and proinflammatory CD4+ T helper cells

As discussed in an earlier section, Th1 and Th17 cells have been implicated in the pathogenesis of multiple autoimmune diseases. Our laboratory and others have shown that Th17 cells come in multiple phenotypes.– Th17 cells differentiated by TGF-β1 and IL-6 produce IL-17 and IL-10 and do not mediate tissue inflammation, thus are referred to as “non-pathogenic” Th17 cells. In contrast, supplementation of IL-23 to the differentiation medium leads to the generation of “pathogenic” Th17 cells. These “pathogenic” Th17 cells drive inflammation in multiple autoimmune disease mouse models., Using microarray analysis and single-cell RNA-seq of Th17 cells, our laboratory identified a unique transcriptional signature of pathogenic Th17 cells., Interestingly, when comparing the transcriptional signature of exhausted T cells to Th17 cells, it is evident that a noteworthy signature overlap exists,, (Fig. 4). Genes that are upregulated in exhausted T cells in cancer and in Th17 cells in autoimmunity might play an important functional role in both settings. Over the last few years, our laboratory successfully validated the functional role of some of these molecules in cancer as well as in autoimmunity. For example, the transmembrane protein podoplanin (PDPN) is highly expressed on Th17 cells and acts as a negative regulator of Th17 pathogenicity. Mice with a selective depletion of PDPN in T cells show enhanced EAE severity with increased T-cell infiltration into the CNS. Interestingly, PDPN was also identified as an important regulator in cancer. PDPN is part of the co-inhibitory gene module upregulated in cancer, and PDPN deficiency in T cells results in retardation of tumor growth. The protein C receptor (PROCR) is another molecule highly expressed in Th17 cells and exhausted T cells., In autoimmunity, PROCR was found to act as a negative regulator of Th17 pathogenicity. PROCR regulated the pathogenic gene module of Th17 cells by modulating expression of IL-1R, a major driver of pathogenic Th17 cells, and T cell-specific deficiency of PROCR resulted in exacerbated EAE. In the tumor setting, PROCR deficiency inhibited tumor growth with decreased frequencies in exhausted (TIM-3High and PD-1High) CD8+ T cells. Another example is the glycosphingolipid receptor GPR65 that was identified in vivo to co-vary with pro-inflammatory genes in single-cell RNA-sequencing of Th17 cells during EAE. Interestingly in contrast to PDPN and PROCR, GPR65 was validated as pathogenic driver of Th17 cells in EAE. Mice deficient in GPR65 were found to be protected from EAE and showed decreased IL-17A- and IFNγ-positive cells in the spleen and lymph nodes when compared to wildtype mice. Interestingly, GPR65 was additionally identified to be part of the co-inhibitory receptor module driven by IL-27. In future studies, additional genes that are shared between proinflammatory Th1 and Th17 signatures and the exhausted T-cell signature may provide a novel set of targets that might differentially impact generation of pathogenic Th17 cells and thereby impact autoimmunity but at the same time may affect development of T-cell exhaustion and promote anti-tumor immunity (Fig. 4). Targeting these molecules has the potential to simultaneously yield benefits for tumor immunity without triggering autoimmune side-effects.

Tumor-specific T-cell signatures

In order to target T cells specifically in the tumor, it will be important to precisely determine the differences between T cells in tumors and those at other tissue sites. Using next generation technologies (e.g., RNA-sequencing, ATAC-sequencing), it is possible to unbiasedly define tumor-specific signatures both in effector cells (CD4+ and CD8+ T cells), regulatory T cells, and myeloid cells. In a recent multi-pronged study carried out by Magnuson et al., the authors discovered a specific transcriptional profile of tumor-infiltrating Tregs across species and tumor types. This study identified multiple candidate genes encoding possible new targets for cancer immunotherapy. Using a CRISPR-based approach, the authors validated some of those targets as potential modulators of Treg infiltration and function in the tumor. The loss-of-function mutations of TNFRSF8, CXCR3, and SAMSN1 resulted in reduced frequencies of tumor-infiltrating Tregs. Similar studies combining computational, molecular, and functional systems aimed to precisely define a tumor specific CD8+ T-cell exhaustion gene signature in order to discover potential new targets for immunotherapies., A recent study identified a subpopulation of “progenitor exhausted” CD8+ T cells, carrying a unique genetic and epigenetic signature and being able to respond better to anti-PD-1 therapy. In melanoma patients, the frequency of these progenitor exhausted cells positively correlates with the duration of response to checkpoint-blockade therapy. These progenitors are characterized by the expression of the transcription factor TCF-1, which sustains stemness and controls effector differentiation. Interestingly, a strict antagonism between TCF-1 and TIM-3 expression exists, with TCF-1 marking stem-like progenitor cells and TIM-3 marking terminally exhausted T cells that fail to be reinvigorated by immune checkpoint blockade.– A better understanding of this potential inverse relationship between TCF-1 and TIM-3 would be critical to manipulate T-cell state and strengthen antitumor responses upon immunotherapies. Having a clearer definition of tumor-specific T-cell phenotypes will allow the design of more tumor-restricted immunotherapies, decreasing uncontrolled responses and limiting autoimmune-like toxicity.

Tumor-specific checkpoint blockade

An additional idea to improve checkpoint blockade is to leverage the efficacy of the current immune checkpoint blockade drugs while limiting the manifestation of irAEs at non-tumor sites. In a recent study by Perez-Ruiz et al., the authors show that prophylactic blockade of TNF ameliorates colitis but enhances tumor immunity in mice. TNF blockade is a well-established treatment option for multiple autoimmune diseases, including rheumatoid arthritis, psoriasis and IBD. Furthermore, TNF blockade is used in patients developing irAEs following immune checkpoint blockade that are refractory to steroids. In this study the authors show that the dual treatment with anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 mAbs worsens DSS-induced colitis. Interestingly, prophylactic blockade of TNF strikingly ameliorates the treatment-induced worsening of the colitis. Moreover, prophylactic TNF blockade does not hinder, but rather enhances, the anti-tumor effect of anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 combination treatment. To address potential clinical applicability, the authors further found the expression of TNF in checkpoint blockade-induced colitis to be increased in the colon when compared to healthy tissue. Based on these findings, they proposed a clinical application of TNF blockers in patients undergoing checkpoint blockade. In fact, a phase I clinical trial (https://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT03293784) is currently assessing the safety and impact on efficacy of the proposed approach. In line with the idea to optimize the “on target” aspect of checkpoint blockade, Zhang et al. designed and modified the pH-sensitivity of an anti-CTLA-4 antibody. Because of the acidic pH in the TME, one would expect the anti-CTLA-4 antibody to be preferentially active in the acidic TME. With this approach the authors were able to prevent antibody-triggered lysosomal degradation. This led to an improved immunotherapeutic effect and decreased the occurrence of irAEs in tumor-bearing mice. However, such approaches would not be effective, if the main activity of the checkpoint blockade occurs in the draining lymph nodes and not in the TME. In the future, it will be important to identify additional agents and modifications that specially inhibit the checkpoint blockade-induced autoimmunity while not impeding the anti-tumor activity.

Conclusion

Immune checkpoint blockade recently transformed cancer treatment by showing remarkable efficacy in multiple types of cancer. However, treatment with immune checkpoint blockade is accompanied by severe autoimmune disease-like side effects that strongly limit the applicability of these drugs. As immune checkpoint blockade becomes more broadly used in cancer treatment, our understanding and treatment of these autoimmune-like irAEs need to improve. Based on our knowledge of the important function of co-inhibitory receptors in autoimmunity, immune checkpoint blockade could be improved using the basic knowledge of tissue-specific autoimmune responses and the ability of various molecules to operate in different effector T cells. Unbiased genomic approaches should be used to define tumor-specific targets for immunotherapy. Additionally, comparisons of T cells infiltrating tumors with those associated with autoimmune tissue destruction will allow identification and characterization of targets that may promote anti-tumor immunity but not drive autoimmune-like side effects. Also noteworthy is a growing body of research focused on novel tumor-restricted immunotherapy strategies beyond the scope of this review. These promising approaches include: (i) Vaccines targeting neoantigens–; (ii) Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy; (iii) Improved delivery of checkpoint blockade antibodies within the TME; (iv) Bispecific antibodies–; and (v) Molecular shields restricting local activity of checkpoint inhibitors.

For future research, we propose studies designed to identify novel regulatory molecules that, when targeted, simultaneously enhance anti-tumor immunity yet suppress autoimmunity.

References 272

  1. 1.

    Anderson MS, et al. Projection of an immunological self shadow within the thymus by the aire protein. Science. 2002;298:1395-1401.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.1075958

  2. 2.

    Derbinski J, Schulte A, Kyewski B, Klein L. Promiscuous gene expression in medullary thymic epithelial cells mirrors the peripheral self. Nat. Immunol. 2001;2:1032-1039.

    Not in our library10.1038/ni723

  3. 3.

    Richards DM, Kyewski B, Feuerer M. Re-examining the nature and function of self-reactive T cells. Trends Immunol. 2016;37:114-125.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.it.2015.12.005

  4. 4.

    Mueller DL, Jenkins MK, Schwartz RH. Clonal expansion versus functional clonal inactivation: a costimulatory signalling pathway determines the outcome of T cell antigen receptor occupancy. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 1989;7:445-480.

    Not in our library10.1146/annurev.iy.07.040189.002305

  5. 5.

    Bretscher P, Cohn M. A theory of self-nonself discrimination. Science. 1970;169:1042-1049.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.169.3950.1042

  6. 6.

    Chen L, Flies DB. Molecular mechanisms of T cell co-stimulation and co-inhibition. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2013;13:227-242.

    Not in our library10.1038/nri3405

  7. 7.

    June CH, Ledbetter JA, Gillespie MM, Lindsten T, Thompson CB. T-cell proliferation involving the CD28 pathway is associated with cyclosporine-resistant interleukin 2 gene expression. Mol. Cell Biol. 1987;7:4472-4481.

    Not in our library10.1128/mcb.7.12.4472

  8. 8.

    Francisco LM, et al. PD-L1 regulates the development, maintenance, and function of induced regulatory T cells. J. Exp. Med. 2009;206:3015-3029.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20090847

  9. 9.

    Wing K, et al. CTLA-4 control over Foxp3+ regulatory T cell function. Science. 2008;322:271-275.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.1160062

  10. 10.

    Zajac AJ, et al. Viral immune evasion due to persistence of activated T cells without effector function. J. Exp. Med. 1998;188:2205-2213.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.188.12.2205

  11. 11.

    Wherry EJ, Blattman JN, Murali-Krishna K, van der Most R, Ahmed R. Viral persistence alters CD8 T-cell immunodominance and tissue distribution and results in distinct stages of functional impairment. J. Virol. 2003;77:4911-4927.

    Not in our library10.1128/jvi.77.8.4911-4927.2003

  12. 12.

    Wherry EJ, Ahmed R. Memory CD8 T-cell differentiation during viral infection. J. Virol. 2004;78:5535-5545.

    Not in our library10.1128/jvi.78.11.5535-5545.2004

  13. 13.

    Wherry EJ. T cell exhaustion. Nat. Immunol. 2011;12:492-499.

    Not in our library10.1038/ni.2035

  14. 14.

    Delpoux A, et al. Continuous activity of Foxo1 is required to prevent anergy and maintain the memory state of CD8(+) T cells. J. Exp. Med. 2018;215:575-594.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20170697

  15. 15.

    Lang KS, et al. Inverse correlation between IL-7 receptor expression and CD8 T cell exhaustion during persistent antigen stimulation. Eur. J. Immunol. 2005;35:738-745.

    Not in our library10.1002/eji.200425828

  16. 16.

    Wherry EJ, Barber DL, Kaech SM, Blattman JN, Ahmed R. Antigen-independent memory CD8 T cells do not develop during chronic viral infection. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2004;101:16004-16009.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.0407192101

  17. 17.

    Oxenius A, Zinkernagel RM, Hengartner H. Comparison of activation versus induction of unresponsiveness of virus-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cells upon acute versus persistent viral infection. Immunity. 1998;9:449-457.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1074-7613(00)80628-7

  18. 18.

    Antoine P, et al. Functional exhaustion of CD4+ T lymphocytes during primary cytomegalovirus infection. J. Immunol. 2012;189:2665-2672.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.1101165

  19. 19.

    Chen CY, et al. Combined treatment with HMGN1 and anti-CD4 depleting antibody reverses T cell exhaustion and exerts robust anti-tumor effects in mice. J. Immunother. Cancer. 2019;7:21.

    Not in our library10.1186/s40425-019-0503-6

  20. 20.

    Penaloza-MacMaster P, Provine NM, Blass E, Barouch DH. CD4 T cell depletion substantially augments the rescue potential of PD-L1 blockade for deeply exhausted CD8 T cells. J. Immunol. 2015;195:1054-1063.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.1403237

  21. 21.

    Sen DR, et al. The epigenetic landscape of T cell exhaustion. Science. 2016;354:1165-1169.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aae0491

  22. 22.

    Wherry EJ, et al. Molecular signature of CD8+ T cell exhaustion during chronic viral infection. Immunity. 2007;27:670-684.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.immuni.2007.09.006

  23. 23.

    Barber DL, et al. Restoring function in exhausted CD8 T cells during chronic viral infection. Nature. 2006;439:682-687.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature04444

  24. 24.

    Freeman GJ, et al. Engagement of the PD-1 immunoinhibitory receptor by a novel B7 family member leads to negative regulation of lymphocyte activation. J. Exp. Med. 2000;192:1027-1034.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.192.7.1027

  25. 25.

    Brown JA, et al. Blockade of programmed death-1 ligands on dendritic cells enhances T cell activation and cytokine production. J. Immunol. 2003;170:1257-1266.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.170.3.1257

  26. 26.

    Velu V, et al. Enhancing SIV-specific immunity in vivo by PD-1 blockade. Nature. 2009;458:206-210.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature07662

  27. 27.

    Quigley M, et al. Transcriptional analysis of HIV-specific CD8+ T cells shows that PD-1 inhibits T cell function by upregulating BATF. Nat. Med. 2010;16:1147-1151.

    Not in our library10.1038/nm.2232

  28. 28.

    Bowen DG, Walker CM. Adaptive immune responses in acute and chronic hepatitis C virus infection. Nature. 2005;436:946-952.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature04079

  29. 29.
  30. 30.

    Baitsch L, et al. Exhaustion of tumor-specific CD8(+) T cells in metastases from melanoma patients. J. Clin. Invest. 2011;121:2350-2360.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci46102

  31. 31.

    McKinney EF, Lee JC, Jayne DR, Lyons PA, Smith KG. T-cell exhaustion, co-stimulation and clinical outcome in autoimmunity and infection. Nature. 2015;523:612-616.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature14468

  32. 32.

    Dardalhon V, Korn T, Kuchroo VK, Anderson AC. Role of Th1 and Th17 cells in organ-specific autoimmunity. J. Autoimmun. 2008;31:252-256.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jaut.2008.04.017

  33. 33.

    Ben-Nun A, Cohen IR. Vaccination against autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE): attenuated autoimmune T lymphocytes confer resistance to induction of active EAE but not to EAE mediated by the intact T lymphocyte line. Eur. J. Immunol. 1981;11:949-952.

    Not in our library10.1002/eji.1830111119

  34. 34.

    Pettinelli CB, McFarlin DE. Adoptive transfer of experimental allergic encephalomyelitis in SJL/J mice after in vitro activation of lymph node cells by myelin basic protein: requirement for Lyt 1+ 2- T lymphocytes. J. Immunol. 1981;127:1420-1423.

    Not in our library

  35. 35.

    Renno T, Krakowski M, Piccirillo C, Lin JY, Owens T. TNF-alpha expression by resident microglia and infiltrating leukocytes in the central nervous system of mice with experimental allergic encephalomyelitis. Regulation by Th1 cytokines. J. Immunol. 1995;154:944-953.

    Not in our library

  36. 36.

    Bettelli E, et al. Loss of T-bet, but not STAT1, prevents the development of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J. Exp. Med. 2004;200:79-87.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20031819

  37. 37.

    Chitnis T, et al. Effect of targeted disruption of STAT4 and STAT6 on the induction of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J. Clin. Invest. 2001;108:739-747.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci200112563

  38. 38.

    Germann T, Hess H, Szeliga J, Rude E. Characterization of the adjuvant effect of IL-12 and efficacy of IL-12 inhibitors in type II collagen-induced arthritis. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1996;795:227-240.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1749-6632.1996.tb52672.x

  39. 39.

    Krakowski M, Owens T. Interferon-gamma confers resistance to experimental allergic encephalomyelitis. Eur. J. Immunol. 1996;26:1641-1646.

    Not in our library10.1002/eji.1830260735

  40. 40.

    Willenborg DO, Fordham S, Bernard CC, Cowden WB, Ramshaw IA. IFN-gamma plays a critical down-regulatory role in the induction and effector phase of myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein-induced autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J. Immunol. 1996;157:3223-3227.

    Not in our library

  41. 41.

    Lock C, et al. Gene-microarray analysis of multiple sclerosis lesions yields new targets validated in autoimmune encephalomyelitis. Nat. Med. 2002;8:500-508.

    Not in our library10.1038/nm0502-500

  42. 42.

    Matusevicius D, et al. Interleukin-17 mRNA expression in blood and CSF mononuclear cells is augmented in multiple sclerosis. Mult. Scler. 1999;5:101-104.

    Not in our library10.1177/135245859900500206

  43. 43.

    Aarvak T, Chabaud M, Miossec P, Natvig JB. IL-17 is produced by some proinflammatory Th1/Th0 cells but not by Th2 cells. J. Immunol. 1999;162:1246-1251.

    Not in our library

  44. 44.

    Teunissen MB, Koomen CW, de Waal Malefyt R, Wierenga EA, Bos JD. Interleukin-17 and interferon-gamma synergize in the enhancement of proinflammatory cytokine production by human keratinocytes. J. Invest. Dermatol. 1998;111:645-649.

    Not in our library10.1046/j.1523-1747.1998.00347.x

  45. 45.

    Burkett PR, Meyer zu Horste G, Kuchroo VK. Pouring fuel on the fire: Th17 cells, the environment, and autoimmunity. J. Clin. Invest. 2015;125:2211-2219.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci78085

  46. 46.

    Bettelli E, et al. Reciprocal developmental pathways for the generation of pathogenic effector TH17 and regulatory T cells. Nature. 2006;441:235-238.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature04753

  47. 47.

    Sutton C, Brereton C, Keogh B, Mills KH, Lavelle EC. A crucial role for interleukin (IL)-1 in the induction of IL-17-producing T cells that mediate autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J. Exp. Med. 2006;203:1685-1691.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20060285

  48. 48.

    Langrish CL, et al. IL-23 drives a pathogenic T cell population that induces autoimmune inflammation. J. Exp. Med. 2005;201:233-240.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20041257

  49. 49.

    Levesque SA, et al. Myeloid cell transmigration across the CNS vasculature triggers IL-1beta-driven neuroinflammation during autoimmune encephalomyelitis in mice. J. Exp. Med. 2016;213:929-949.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20151437

  50. 50.

    Okuda Y, et al. IL-6 plays a crucial role in the induction phase of myelin oligodendrocyte glucoprotein 35-55 induced experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J. Neuroimmunol. 1999;101:188-196.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0165-5728(99)00139-3

  51. 51.

    Thakker P, et al. IL-23 is critical in the induction but not in the effector phase of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J. Immunol. 2007;178:2589-2598.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.178.4.2589

  52. 52.

    Korn T, et al. Myelin-specific regulatory T cells accumulate in the CNS but fail to control autoimmune inflammation. Nat. Med. 2007;13:423-431.

    Not in our library10.1038/nm1564

  53. 53.

    Gaublomme JT, et al. Single-cell genomics unveils critical regulators of Th17 cell pathogenicity. Cell. 2015;163:1400-1412.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2015.11.009

  54. 54.

    Hirota K, et al. Fate mapping of IL-17-producing T cells in inflammatory responses. Nat. Immunol. 2011;12:255-263.

    Not in our library10.1038/ni.1993

  55. 55.

    Meyer Zu Horste G, et al. Fas promotes T Helper 17 cell differentiation and inhibits T helper 1 cell development by binding and sequestering transcription factor STAT1. Immunity. 2018;48:556-569 e557.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.immuni.2018.03.008

  56. 56.

    Burkett PR, Kuchroo VK. IL-17 blockade in psoriasis. Cell. 2016;167:1669.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2016.11.044

  57. 57.

    Chatzantoni K, Mouzaki A. Anti-TNF-alpha antibody therapies in autoimmune diseases. Curr. Top. Med. Chem. 2006;6:1707-1714.

    Not in our library10.2174/156802606778194217

  58. 58.

    June CH, Warshauer JT, Bluestone JA. Is autoimmunity the Achilles' heel of cancer immunotherapy? Nat. Med. 2017;23:540-547.

    Not in our library10.1038/nm.4321

  59. 59.

    Michot JM, et al. Immune-related adverse events with immune checkpoint blockade: a comprehensive review. Eur. J. Cancer. 2016;54:139-148.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ejca.2015.11.016

  60. 60.

    Brunet JF, et al. A new member of the immunoglobulin superfamily–CTLA-4. Nature. 1987;328:267-270.

    Not in our library10.1038/328267a0

  61. 61.

    Linsley PS, et al. CTLA-4 is a second receptor for the B cell activation antigen B7. J. Exp. Med. 1991;174:561-569.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.174.3.561

  62. 62.

    Walunas TL, et al. CTLA-4 can function as a negative regulator of T cell activation. Immunity. 1994;1:405-413.

    Not in our library10.1016/1074-7613(94)90071-x

  63. 63.

    Lenschow DJ, Walunas TL, Bluestone JA. CD28/B7 system of T cell costimulation. Annu. Rev. Immunol. 1996;14:233-258.

    Not in our library10.1146/annurev.immunol.14.1.233

  64. 64.

    Linsley PS, et al. Human B7-1 (CD80) and B7-2 (CD86) bind with similar avidities but distinct kinetics to CD28 and CTLA-4 receptors. Immunity. 1994;1:793-801.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1074-7613(94)80021-9

  65. 65.

    Krummel MF, Sullivan TJ, Allison JP. Superantigen responses and co-stimulation: CD28 and CTLA-4 have opposing effects on T cell expansion in vitro and in vivo. Int. Immunol. 1996;8:519-523.

    Not in our library10.1093/intimm/8.4.519

  66. 66.

    Leach DR, Krummel MF, Allison JP. Enhancement of antitumor immunity by CTLA-4 blockade. Science. 1996;271:1734-1736.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.271.5256.1734

  67. 67.

    Tivol EA, et al. Loss of CTLA-4 leads to massive lymphoproliferation and fatal multiorgan tissue destruction, revealing a critical negative regulatory role of CTLA-4. Immunity. 1995;3:541-547.

    Not in our library10.1016/1074-7613(95)90125-6

  68. 68.

    Waterhouse P, et al. Lymphoproliferative disorders with early lethality in mice deficient in Ctla-4. Science. 1995;270:985-988.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.270.5238.985

  69. 69.

    Klocke K, Sakaguchi S, Holmdahl R, Wing K. Induction of autoimmune disease by deletion of CTLA-4 in mice in adulthood. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2016;113:E2383-E2392.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1603892113

  70. 70.

    Kristiansen OP, Larsen ZM, Pociot F. CTLA-4 in autoimmune diseases–a general susceptibility gene to autoimmunity? Genes Immun. 2000;1:170-184.

    Not in our library10.1038/sj.gene.6363655

  71. 71.

    Luhder F, Hoglund P, Allison JP, Benoist C, Mathis D. Cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) regulates the unfolding of autoimmune diabetes. J. Exp. Med. 1998;187:427-432.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.187.3.427

  72. 72.

    Karandikar NJ, Vanderlugt CL, Walunas TL, Miller SD, Bluestone JA. CTLA-4: a negative regulator of autoimmune disease. J. Exp. Med. 1996;184:783-788.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.184.2.783

  73. 73.

    Paterson AM, et al. Deletion of CTLA-4 on regulatory T cells during adulthood leads to resistance to autoimmunity. J. Exp. Med. 2015;212:1603-1621.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20141030

  74. 74.

    Magistrelli G, et al. A soluble form of CTLA-4 generated by alternative splicing is expressed by nonstimulated human T cells. Eur. J. Immunol. 1999;29:3596-3602.

    Not in our library10.1002/(sici)1521-4141(199911)29:11<3596::aid-immu3596>3.0.co;2-y

  75. 75.

    Ueda H, et al. Association of the T-cell regulatory gene CTLA4 with susceptibility to autoimmune disease. Nature. 2003;423:506-511.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature01621

  76. 76.

    Araki M, et al. Genetic evidence that the differential expression of the ligand-independent isoform of CTLA-4 is the molecular basis of the Idd5.1 type 1 diabetes region in nonobese diabetic mice. J. Immunol. 2009;183:5146-5157.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.0802610

  77. 77.

    Stumpf M, Zhou X, Bluestone JA. The B7-independent isoform of CTLA-4 functions to regulate autoimmune diabetes. J. Immunol. 2013;190:961-969.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.1201362

  78. 78.

    Vijayakrishnan L, et al. An autoimmune disease-associated CTLA-4 splice variant lacking the B7 binding domain signals negatively in T cells. Immunity. 2004;20:563-575.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1074-7613(04)00110-4

  79. 79.

    Ishida Y, Agata Y, Shibahara K, Honjo T. Induced expression of PD-1, a novel member of the immunoglobulin gene superfamily, upon programmed cell death. EMBO J. 1992;11:3887-3895.

    Not in our library10.1002/j.1460-2075.1992.tb05481.x

  80. 80.

    Francisco LM, Sage PT, Sharpe AH. The PD-1 pathway in tolerance and autoimmunity. Immunol. Rev. 2010;236:219-242.

    Not in our library10.1111/j.1600-065x.2010.00923.x

  81. 81.

    Nishimura H, et al. Autoimmune dilated cardiomyopathy in PD-1 receptor-deficient mice. Science. 2001;291:319-322.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.291.5502.319

  82. 82.

    Nishimura H, Nose M, Hiai H, Minato N, Honjo T. Development of lupus-like autoimmune diseases by disruption of the PD-1 gene encoding an ITIM motif-carrying immunoreceptor. Immunity. 1999;11:141-151.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1074-7613(00)80089-8

  83. 83.

    Wang J, et al. Establishment of NOD-Pdcd1−/− mice as an efficient animal model of type I diabetes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2005;102:11823-11828.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.0505497102

  84. 84.

    Salama AD, et al. Critical role of the programmed death-1 (PD-1) pathway in regulation of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J. Exp. Med. 2003;198:71-78.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20022119

  85. 85.

    Prokunina L, et al. A regulatory polymorphism in PDCD1 is associated with susceptibility to systemic lupus erythematosus in humans. Nat. Genet. 2002;32:666-669.

    Not in our library10.1038/ng1020

  86. 86.

    Nielsen C, Hansen D, Husby S, Jacobsen BB, Lillevang ST. Association of a putative regulatory polymorphism in the PD-1 gene with susceptibility to type 1 diabetes. Tissue Antigens. 2003;62:492-497.

    Not in our library10.1046/j.1399-0039.2003.00136.x

  87. 87.

    Lee SH, et al. Association of the programmed cell death 1 (PDCD1) gene polymorphism with ankylosing spondylitis in the Korean population. Arthritis Res. Ther. 2006;8:R163.

    Not in our library10.1186/ar2071

  88. 88.

    Prokunina L, et al. Association of the PD-1.3A allele of the PDCD1 gene in patients with rheumatoid arthritis negative for rheumatoid factor and the shared epitope. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50:1770-1773.

    Not in our library10.1002/art.20280

  89. 89.

    Monney L, et al. Th1-specific cell surface protein Tim-3 regulates macrophage activation and severity of an autoimmune disease. Nature. 2002;415:536-541.

    Not in our library10.1038/415536a

  90. 90.

    Anderson AC, Joller N, Kuchroo VK. Lag-3, Tim-3, and TIGIT: co-inhibitory receptors with specialized functions in immune regulation. Immunity. 2016;44:989-1004.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.immuni.2016.05.001

  91. 91.

    Zhu C, et al. The Tim-3 ligand galectin-9 negatively regulates T helper type 1 immunity. Nat. Immunol. 2005;6:1245-1252.

    Not in our library10.1038/ni1271

  92. 92.

    DeKruyff RH, et al. T cell/transmembrane, Ig, and mucin-3 allelic variants differentially recognize phosphatidylserine and mediate phagocytosis of apoptotic cells. J. Immunol. 2010;184:1918-1930.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.0903059

  93. 93.

    Huang YH, et al. CEACAM1 regulates TIM-3-mediated tolerance and exhaustion. Nature. 2015;517:386-390.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature13848

  94. 94.

    Li X, et al. Involvement of T cell Ig Mucin-3 (Tim-3) in the negative regulation of inflammatory bowel disease. Clin. Immunol. 2010;134:169-177.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.clim.2009.09.012

  95. 95.

    Sanchez-Fueyo A, et al. Tim-3 inhibits T helper type 1-mediated auto- and alloimmune responses and promotes immunological tolerance. Nat. Immunol. 2003;4:1093-1101.

    Not in our library10.1038/ni987

  96. 96.

    Koguchi K, et al. Dysregulated T cell expression of TIM3 in multiple sclerosis. J. Exp. Med. 2006;203:1413-1418.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20060210

  97. 97.
  98. 98.

    Kanai Y, Satoh T, Igawa K, Yokozeki H. Impaired expression of Tim-3 on Th17 and Th1 cells in psoriasis. Acta Derm. Venereol. 2012;92:367-371.

    Not in our library10.2340/00015555-1285

  99. 99.

    Liu Y, et al. Increased Tim-3 expression on peripheral lymphocytes from patients with rheumatoid arthritis negatively correlates with disease activity. Clin. Immunol. 2010;137:288-295.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.clim.2010.07.012

  100. 100.

    Shi F, et al. Dysregulated Tim-3 expression and its correlation with imbalanced CD4 helper T cell function in ulcerative colitis. Clin. Immunol. 2012;145:230-240.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.clim.2012.09.001

  101. 101.

    Hastings WD, et al. TIM-3 is expressed on activated human CD4+ T cells and regulates Th1 and Th17 cytokines. Eur. J. Immunol. 2009;39:2492-2501.

    Not in our library10.1002/eji.200939274

  102. 102.

    Gayden T, et al. Germline HAVCR2 mutations altering TIM-3 characterize subcutaneous panniculitis-like T cell lymphomas with hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytic syndrome. Nat. Genet. 2018;50:1650-1657.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41588-018-0251-4

  103. 103.

    Lee J, Phong B, Egloff AM, Kane LP. TIM polymorphisms–genetics and function. Genes Immun. 2011;12:595-604.

    Not in our library10.1038/gene.2011.75

  104. 104.

    Boles KS, et al. A novel molecular interaction for the adhesion of follicular CD4 T cells to follicular DC. Eur. J. Immunol. 2009;39:695-703.

    Not in our library10.1002/eji.200839116

  105. 105.

    Joller N, et al. Treg cells expressing the coinhibitory molecule TIGIT selectively inhibit proinflammatory Th1 and Th17 cell responses. Immunity. 2014;40:569-581.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.immuni.2014.02.012

  106. 106.

    Yu X, et al. The surface protein TIGIT suppresses T cell activation by promoting the generation of mature immunoregulatory dendritic cells. Nat. Immunol. 2009;10:48-57.

    Not in our library10.1038/ni.1674

  107. 107.

    Stanietsky N, et al. The interaction of TIGIT with PVR and PVRL2 inhibits human NK cell cytotoxicity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2009;106:17858-17863.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.0903474106

  108. 108.

    Joller N, et al. Cutting edge: TIGIT has T cell-intrinsic inhibitory functions. J. Immunol. 2011;186:1338-1342.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.1003081

  109. 109.

    Levin SD, et al. Vstm3 is a member of the CD28 family and an important modulator of T-cell function. Eur. J. Immunol. 2011;41:902-915.

    Not in our library10.1002/eji.201041136

  110. 110.

    Hafler JP, et al. CD226 Gly307Ser association with multiple autoimmune diseases. Genes Immun. 2009;10:5-10.

    Not in our library10.1038/gene.2008.82

  111. 111.

    Maiti AK, et al. Non-synonymous variant (Gly307Ser) in CD226 is associated with susceptibility to multiple autoimmune diseases. Rheumatol. (Oxf.). 2010;49:1239-1244.

    Not in our library10.1093/rheumatology/kep470

  112. 112.

    Triebel F, et al. LAG-3, a novel lymphocyte activation gene closely related to CD4. J. Exp. Med. 1990;171:1393-1405.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.171.5.1393

  113. 113.

    Huard B, Prigent P, Tournier M, Bruniquel D, Triebel F. CD4/major histocompatibility complex class II interaction analyzed with CD4- and lymphocyte activation gene-3 (LAG-3)-Ig fusion proteins. Eur. J. Immunol. 1995;25:2718-2721.

    Not in our library10.1002/eji.1830250949

  114. 114.

    Xu F, et al. LSECtin expressed on melanoma cells promotes tumor progression by inhibiting antitumor T-cell responses. Cancer Res. 2014;74:3418-3428.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-13-2690

  115. 115.

    Wang J, et al. Fibrinogen-like protein 1 is a major immune inhibitory ligand of LAG-3. Cell. 2019;176:334-347 e312.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2018.11.010

  116. 116.

    Jha V, et al. Lymphocyte Activation Gene-3 (LAG-3) negatively regulates environmentally-induced autoimmunity. PLoS ONE. 2014;9:e104484.

    Not in our library10.1371/journal.pone.0104484

  117. 117.

    Bettini M, et al. Cutting edge: accelerated autoimmune diabetes in the absence of LAG-3. J. Immunol. 2011;187:3493-3498.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.1100714

  118. 118.

    McKinney EF, Smith KG. T cell exhaustion and immune-mediated disease-the potential for therapeutic exhaustion. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 2016;43:74-80.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.coi.2016.09.005

  119. 119.
  120. 120.

    Dixon KO, et al. Functional anti-TIGIT antibodies regulate development of autoimmunity and antitumor immunity. J. Immunol. 2018;200:3000-3007.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.1700407

  121. 121.

    Raptopoulou AP, et al. The programmed death 1/programmed death ligand 1 inhibitory pathway is up-regulated in rheumatoid synovium and regulates peripheral T cell responses in human and murine arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2010;62:1870-1880.

    Not in our library10.1002/art.27500

  122. 122.

    Seki M, et al. Galectin-9 suppresses the generation of Th17, promotes the induction of regulatory T cells, and regulates experimental autoimmune arthritis. Clin. Immunol. 2008;127:78-88.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.clim.2008.01.006

  123. 123.

    Chihara N, et al. Induction and transcriptional regulation of the co-inhibitory gene module in T cells. Nature. 2018;558:454-459.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-018-0206-z

  124. 124.
  125. 125.

    Ehrlich, P. Beitr©Þge zur experimentellen Pathologie und Chemotherapie. (Akademische Verlagsgesellschaft, 1909).

    Not in our library

  126. 126.

    Coley WB. Contribution to the knowledge of sarcoma. Ann. Surg. 1891;14:199-220.

    Not in our library10.1097/00000658-189112000-00015

  127. 127.

    Coley WB. The treatment of inoperable sarcoma by bacterial toxins (the mixed toxins of the streptococcus erysipelas and the Bacillus prodigiosus). Proc. R. Soc. Med. 1910;3:1-48.

    Not in our library10.1177/003591571000301601

  128. 128.

    Burnet M. Immunological factors in the process of carcinogenesis. Br. Med. Bull. 1964;20:154-158.

    Not in our library10.1093/oxfordjournals.bmb.a070310

  129. 129.

    Burnet FM. The concept of immunological surveillance. Prog. Exp. Tumor. Res. 1970;13:1-27.

    Not in our library10.1159/000386035

  130. 130.

    Alexandrov LB, et al. Signatures of mutational processes in human cancer. Nature. 2013;500:415-421.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature12477

  131. 131.

    Koebel CM, et al. Adaptive immunity maintains occult cancer in an equilibrium state. Nature. 2007;450:903-907.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature06309

  132. 132.

    Shankaran V, et al. IFNgamma and lymphocytes prevent primary tumour development and shape tumour immunogenicity. Nature. 2001;410:1107-1111.

    Not in our library10.1038/35074122

  133. 133.

    Castle JC, et al. Exploiting the mutanome for tumor vaccination. Cancer Res. 2012;72:1081-1091.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-11-3722

  134. 134.

    Matsushita H, et al. Cancer exome analysis reveals a T-cell-dependent mechanism of cancer immunoediting. Nature. 2012;482:400-404.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature10755

  135. 135.

    Boon T, Old LJ. Cancer tumor antigens. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 1997;9:681-683.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0952-7915(97)80049-0

  136. 136.

    Ikeda H, Old LJ, Schreiber RD. The roles of IFN gamma in protection against tumor development and cancer immunoediting. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 2002;13:95-109.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1359-6101(01)00038-7

  137. 137.

    Wherry EJ, et al. Lineage relationship and protective immunity of memory CD8 T cell subsets. Nat. Immunol. 2003;4:225-234.

    Not in our library10.1038/ni889

  138. 138.

    Kaech SM, Cui W. Transcriptional control of effector and memory CD8+ T cell differentiation. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2012;12:749-761.

    Not in our library10.1038/nri3307

  139. 139.

    Sallusto F, Lenig D, Forster R, Lipp M, Lanzavecchia A. Two subsets of memory T lymphocytes with distinct homing potentials and effector functions. Nature. 1999;401:708-712.

    Not in our library10.1038/44385

  140. 140.

    Fridman WH, Pages F, Sautes-Fridman C, Galon J. The immune contexture in human tumours: impact on clinical outcome. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2012;12:298-306.

    Not in our library10.1038/nrc3245

  141. 141.

    Pages F, et al. International validation of the consensus Immunoscore for the classification of colon cancer: a prognostic and accuracy study. Lancet. 2018;391:2128-2139.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0140-6736(18)30789-x

  142. 142.

    Moskophidis D, Lechner F, Pircher H, Zinkernagel RM. Virus persistence in acutely infected immunocompetent mice by exhaustion of antiviral cytotoxic effector T cells. Nature. 1993;362:758-761.

    Not in our library10.1038/362758a0

  143. 143.

    Lee PP, et al. Characterization of circulating T cells specific for tumor-associated antigens in melanoma patients. Nat. Med. 1999;5:677-685.

    Not in our library10.1038/9525

  144. 144.

    Zippelius A, et al. Effector function of human tumor-specific CD8 T cells in melanoma lesions: a state of local functional tolerance. Cancer Res. 2004;64:2865-2873.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-03-3066

  145. 145.

    Singer M, et al. A distinct gene module for dysfunction uncoupled from activation in tumor-infiltrating T cells. Cell. 2016;166:1500-1511 e1509.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2016.08.052

  146. 146.

    Vodnala, S. K. et al. T cell stemness and dysfunction in tumors are triggered by a common mechanism. Science363, 10.1126/science.aau0135 (2019).

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aau0135

  147. 147.

    Alfei F, et al. TOX reinforces the phenotype and longevity of exhausted T cells in chronic viral infection. Nature. 2019;571:265-269.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-019-1326-9

  148. 148.

    Scott AC, et al. TOX is a critical regulator of tumour-specific T cell differentiation. Nature. 2019;571:270-274.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-019-1324-y

  149. 149.

    Khan O, et al. TOX transcriptionally and epigenetically programs CD8(+) T cell exhaustion. Nature. 2019;571:211-218.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-019-1325-x

  150. 150.

    Chambers CA, Allison JP. CTLA-4–the costimulatory molecule that doesn't: regulation of T-cell responses by inhibition. Cold Spring Harb. Symp. Quant. Biol. 1999;64:303-312.

    Not in our library10.1101/sqb.1999.64.303

  151. 151.

    Greenfield EA, et al. B7.2 expressed by T cells does not induce CD28-mediated costimulatory activity but retains CTLA4 binding: implications for induction of antitumor immunity to T cell tumors. J. Immunol. 1997;158:2025-2034.

    Not in our library

  152. 152.

    Contardi E, et al. CTLA-4 is constitutively expressed on tumor cells and can trigger apoptosis upon ligand interaction. Int. J. Cancer. 2005;117:538-550.

    Not in our library10.1002/ijc.21155

  153. 153.

    Paradis TJ, et al. The anti-tumor activity of anti-CTLA-4 is mediated through its induction of IFN gamma. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2001;50:125-133.

    Not in our library10.1007/s002620100181

  154. 154.

    Shrikant P, Khoruts A, Mescher MF. CTLA-4 blockade reverses CD8+ T cell tolerance to tumor by a CD4+ T cell- and IL-2-dependent mechanism. Immunity. 1999;11:483-493.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1074-7613(00)80123-5

  155. 155.
  156. 156.

    Simpson TR, et al. Fc-dependent depletion of tumor-infiltrating regulatory T cells co-defines the efficacy of anti-CTLA-4 therapy against melanoma. J. Exp. Med. 2013;210:1695-1710.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20130579

  157. 157.

    Roncella S, et al. CTLA-4 in mesothelioma patients: tissue expression, body fluid levels and possible relevance as a prognostic factor. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2016;65:909-917.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00262-016-1844-3

  158. 158.

    Huang PY, et al. Tumor CTLA-4 overexpression predicts poor survival in patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma. Oncotarget. 2016;7:13060-13068.

    Not in our library10.18632/oncotarget.7421

  159. 159.

    Shah KV, Chien AJ, Yee C, Moon RT. CTLA-4 is a direct target of Wnt/beta-catenin signaling and is expressed in human melanoma tumors. J. Invest. Dermatol. 2008;128:2870-2879.

    Not in our library10.1038/jid.2008.170

  160. 160.

    Paulsen EE, et al. CTLA-4 expression in the non-small cell lung cancer patient tumor microenvironment: diverging prognostic impact in primary tumors and lymph node metastases. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2017;66:1449-1461.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00262-017-2039-2

  161. 161.

    Sun T, Hu Z, Shen H, Lin D. Genetic polymorphisms in cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4 and cancer: the dialectical nature of subtle human immune dysregulation. Cancer Res. 2009;69:6011-6014.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-09-0176

  162. 162.

    Yang M, et al. The functional cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated Protein 4 49G-to-A genetic variant and risk of pancreatic cancer. Cancer. 2012;118:4681-4686.

    Not in our library10.1002/cncr.27455

  163. 163.

    Li D, et al. Association of CTLA-4 gene polymorphisms with sporadic breast cancer risk and clinical features in Han women of northeast China. Mol. Cell Biochem. 2012;364:283-290.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11010-012-1228-8

  164. 164.

    Latchman Y, et al. PD-L2 is a second ligand for PD-1 and inhibits T cell activation. Nat. Immunol. 2001;2:261-268.

    Not in our library10.1038/85330

  165. 165.

    Ishida M, et al. Differential expression of PD-L1 and PD-L2, ligands for an inhibitory receptor PD-1, in the cells of lymphohematopoietic tissues. Immunol. Lett. 2002;84:57-62.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0165-2478(02)00142-6

  166. 166.

    Iwai Y, et al. Involvement of PD-L1 on tumor cells in the escape from host immune system and tumor immunotherapy by PD-L1 blockade. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2002;99:12293-12297.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.192461099

  167. 167.

    Juneja VR, 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.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20160801

  168. 168.

    Curiel TJ, et al. Blockade of B7-H1 improves myeloid dendritic cell-mediated antitumor immunity. Nat. Med. 2003;9:562-567.

    Not in our library10.1038/nm863

  169. 169.

    Strome SE, et al. B7-H1 blockade augments adoptive T-cell immunotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Res. 2003;63:6501-6505.

    Not in our library

  170. 170.

    Blank C, et al. PD-L1/B7H-1 inhibits the effector phase of tumor rejection by T cell receptor (TCR) transgenic CD8+ T cells. Cancer Res. 2004;64:1140-1145.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-03-3259

  171. 171.

    He YF, et al. Blocking programmed death-1 ligand-PD-1 interactions by local gene therapy results in enhancement of antitumor effect of secondary lymphoid tissue chemokine. J. Immunol. 2004;173:4919-4928.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.173.8.4919

  172. 172.

    Chen J, Jiang CC, Jin L, Zhang XD. Regulation of PD-L1: a novel role of pro-survival signalling in cancer. Ann. Oncol. 2016;27:409-416.

    Not in our library10.1093/annonc/mdv615

  173. 173.

    Khunger, M. et al. Programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) ligand (PD-L1) expression in solid tumors as a predictive biomarker of benefit from PD-1/PD-L1 axis inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JCO Precis. Oncol., 1–15, 10.1200/po.16.00030 (2017).

    Not in our library10.1200/po.16.00030

  174. 174.

    Salmaninejad A, et al. PD-1 and cancer: molecular mechanisms and polymorphisms. Immunogenetics. 2018;70:73-86.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00251-017-1015-5

  175. 175.

    Dardalhon V, et al. Tim-3/galectin-9 pathway: regulation of Th1 immunity through promotion of CD11b+Ly-6G+ myeloid cells. J. Immunol. 2010;185:1383-1392.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.0903275

  176. 176.

    Anderson AC, et al. T-bet, a Th1 transcription factor regulates the expression of Tim-3. Eur. J. Immunol. 2010;40:859-866.

    Not in our library10.1002/eji.200939842

  177. 177.

    Sabatos CA, et al. Interaction of Tim-3 and Tim-3 ligand regulates T helper type 1 responses and induction of peripheral tolerance. Nat. Immunol. 2003;4:1102-1110.

    Not in our library10.1038/ni988

  178. 178.

    Fourcade J, et al. PD-1 and Tim-3 regulate the expansion of tumor antigen-specific CD8(+) T cells induced by melanoma vaccines. Cancer Res. 2014;74:1045-1055.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-13-2908

  179. 179.

    Sakuishi K, et al. Targeting Tim-3 and PD-1 pathways to reverse T cell exhaustion and restore anti-tumor immunity. J. Exp. Med. 2010;207:2187-2194.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20100643

  180. 180.

    Rangachari M, et al. Bat3 promotes T cell responses and autoimmunity by repressing Tim-3-mediated cell death and exhaustion. Nat. Med. 2012;18:1394-1400.

    Not in our library10.1038/nm.2871

  181. 181.

    Zhang Y, Cai P, Liang T, Wang L, Hu L. TIM-3 is a potential prognostic marker for patients with solid tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget. 2017;8:31705-31713.

    Not in our library10.18632/oncotarget.15954

  182. 182.

    Xu B, et al. Circulating and tumor-infiltrating Tim-3 in patients with colorectal cancer. Oncotarget. 2015;6:20592-20603.

    Not in our library10.18632/oncotarget.4112

  183. 183.

    Cai C, et al. T-cell immunoglobulin- and mucin-domain-containing molecule 3 gene polymorphisms and renal cell carcinoma. DNA Cell Biol. 2012;31:1285-1289.

    Not in our library10.1089/dna.2012.1625

  184. 184.

    Tong D, et al. T cell immunoglobulin- and mucin-domain-containing molecule 3 gene polymorphisms and susceptibility to pancreatic cancer. Mol. Biol. Rep. 2012;39:9941-9946.

    Not in our library10.1007/s11033-012-1862-y

  185. 185.

    Bai J, et al. T-cell immunoglobulin- and mucin-domain-containing molecule 3 gene polymorphisms and prognosis of non-small-cell lung cancer. Tumour Biol. 2013;34:805-809.

    Not in our library10.1007/s13277-012-0610-1

  186. 186.

    Gao X, Yang J, He Y, Zhang J. Quantitative assessment of TIM-3 polymorphisms and cancer risk in Chinese Han population. Oncotarget. 2016;7:35768-35775.

    Not in our library10.18632/oncotarget.8157

  187. 187.

    He Y, et al. TIM-3, a promising target for cancer immunotherapy. Onco Targets Ther. 2018;11:7005-7009.

    Not in our library10.2147/ott.s170385

  188. 188.

    Johnston RJ, et al. The immunoreceptor TIGIT regulates antitumor and antiviral CD8(+) T cell effector function. Cancer Cell. 2014;26:923-937.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ccell.2014.10.018

  189. 189.

    Chauvin JM, et al. TIGIT and PD-1 impair tumor antigen-specific CD8(+) T cells in melanoma patients. J. Clin. Invest. 2015;125:2046-2058.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci80445

  190. 190.

    Inozume T, et al. Melanoma cells control anti-melanoma CTL responses via interaction between TIGIT and CD155 in the effector phase. J. Invest. Dermatol. 2015.

    Not in our library10.1038/jid.2015.404

  191. 191.

    Blessin NC, et al. Patterns of TIGIT expression in lymphatic tissue, inflammation, and cancer. Dis. Markers. 2019;2019:5160565.

    Not in our library10.1155/2019/5160565

  192. 192.

    Li XY, et al. CD155 loss enhances tumor suppression via combined host and tumor-intrinsic mechanisms. J. Clin. Invest. 2018;128:2613-2625.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci98769

  193. 193.

    Zhang B, et al. Immunoreceptor TIGIT inhibits the cytotoxicity of human cytokine-induced killer cells by interacting with CD155. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2016;65:305-314.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00262-016-1799-4

  194. 194.

    Mahnke K, Enk AH. TIGIT-CD155 interactions in melanoma: a novel co-inhibitory pathway with potential for clinical intervention. J. Invest. Dermatol. 2016;136:9-11.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.jid.2015.10.048

  195. 195.

    Kurtulus S, et al. TIGIT predominantly regulates the immune response via regulatory T cells. J. Clin. Invest. 2015;125:4053-4062.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci81187

  196. 196.
  197. 197.

    Josefsson SE, et al. TIGIT and PD-1 mark intratumoral T cells with reduced effector function in B-cell non-hodgkin lymphoma. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2019;7:355-362.

    Not in our library10.1158/2326-6066.cir-18-0351

  198. 198.

    Fourcade, J. et al. CD226 opposes TIGIT to disrupt Tregs in melanoma. JCI Insight3, 10.1172/jci.insight.121157 (2018).

    Not in our library10.1172/jci.insight.121157

  199. 199.

    Catakovic K, et al. TIGIT expressing CD4+T cells represent a tumor-supportive T cell subset in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Oncoimmunology. 2017;7:e1371399.

    Not in our library10.1080/2162402x.2017.1371399

  200. 200.

    Kong Y, et al. T-cell immunoglobulin and ITIM domain (TIGIT) associates with CD8+ T-cell exhaustion and poor clinical outcome in AML patients. Clin. Cancer Res. 2016;22:3057-3066.

    Not in our library10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-15-2626

  201. 201.

    Solomon BL, Garrido-Laguna I. TIGIT: a novel immunotherapy target moving from bench to bedside. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2018;67:1659-1667.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00262-018-2246-5

  202. 202.

    Wu L, et al. Blockade of TIGIT/CD155 signaling reverses T-cell exhaustion and enhances antitumor capability in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2019.

    Not in our library10.1158/2326-6066.cir-18-0725

  203. 203.

    Grosso JF, et al. LAG-3 regulates CD8+ T cell accumulation and effector function in murine self- and tumor-tolerance systems. J. Clin. Invest. 2007;117:3383-3392.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci31184

  204. 204.

    Gandhi MK, et al. Expression of LAG-3 by tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes is coincident with the suppression of latent membrane antigen-specific CD8+ T-cell function in Hodgkin lymphoma patients. Blood. 2006;108:2280-2289.

    Not in our library10.1182/blood-2006-04-015164

  205. 205.

    Demeure CE, Wolfers J, Martin-Garcia N, Gaulard P, Triebel F. T Lymphocytes infiltrating various tumour types express the MHC class II ligand lymphocyte activation gene-3 (LAG-3): role of LAG-3/MHC class II interactions in cell-cell contacts. Eur. J. Cancer. 2001;37:1709-1718.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0959-8049(01)00184-8

  206. 206.

    Casati C, et al. Soluble human LAG-3 molecule amplifies the in vitro generation of type 1 tumor-specific immunity. Cancer Res. 2006;66:4450-4460.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-05-2728

  207. 207.

    Huard B, Tournier M, Triebel F. LAG-3 does not define a specific mode of natural killing in human. Immunol. Lett. 1998;61:109-112.

    Not in our library10.1016/s0165-2478(97)00170-3

  208. 208.

    Miyazaki T, Dierich A, Benoist C, Mathis D. Independent modes of natural killing distinguished in mice lacking Lag3. Science. 1996;272:405-408.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.272.5260.405

  209. 209.

    Wierz M, et al. Dual PD1/LAG3 immune checkpoint blockade limits tumor development in a murine model of chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood. 2018;131:1617-1621.

    Not in our library10.1182/blood-2017-06-792267

  210. 210.

    Nguyen LT, Ohashi PS. Clinical blockade of PD1 and LAG3–potential mechanisms of action. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2015;15:45-56.

    Not in our library10.1038/nri3790

  211. 211.
  212. 212.

    Woo SR, et al. Immune inhibitory molecules LAG-3 and PD-1 synergistically regulate T-cell function to promote tumoral immune escape. Cancer Res. 2012;72:917-927.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-11-1620

  213. 213.

    Hodi FS, et al. Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 2010;363:711-723.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmoa1003466

  214. 214.

    Callahan MK, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma: updated survival, response, and safety data in a phase I dose-escalation study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2018;36:391-398.

    Not in our library10.1200/jco.2017.72.2850

  215. 215.

    D'Angelo SP, et al. Nivolumab with or without ipilimumab treatment for metastatic sarcoma (Alliance A091401): two open-label, non-comparative, randomised, phase 2 trials. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19:416-426.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30006-8

  216. 216.

    Hodi FS, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab or nivolumab alone versus ipilimumab alone in advanced melanoma (CheckMate 067): 4-year outcomes of a multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19:1480-1492.

    Not in our library10.1016/s1470-2045(18)30700-9

  217. 217.

    Kon E, Benhar I. Immune checkpoint inhibitor combinations: current efforts and important aspects for success. Drug Resist. Updat. 2019;45:13-29.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.drup.2019.07.004

  218. 218.

    Tundo, G. R., Sbardella, D., Lacal, P. M., Graziani, G. & Marini, S. On the horizon: targeting next-generation immune checkpoints for cancer treatment. Chemotherapy, 1–19, 10.1159/000500902 (2019).

    Not in our library10.1159/000500902

  219. 219.

    Sznol, M. Long-term results encouraging for combination immunotherapy for advanced melanoma. ASCO 2014 (Chicago, 2014).

    Not in our library

  220. 220.

    Sharma P, Hu-Lieskovan S, Wargo JA, Ribas A. Primary, adaptive, and acquired resistance to cancer immunotherapy. Cell. 2017;168:707-723.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.cell.2017.01.017

  221. 221.

    Zappasodi R, Merghoub T, Wolchok JD. Emerging concepts for immune checkpoint blockade-based combination therapies. Cancer Cell. 2018;33:581-598.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.ccell.2018.03.005

  222. 222.

    Duperret EK, et al. Synthetic DNA-encoded monoclonal antibody delivery of Anti-CTLA-4 antibodies induces tumor shrinkage in vivo. Cancer Res. 2018;78:6363-6370.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-18-1429

  223. 223.

    Ha D, et al. Differential control of human Treg and effector T cells in tumor immunity by Fc-engineered anti-CTLA-4 antibody. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2019;116:609-618.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1812186116

  224. 224.

    Sckisel GD, et al. Late administration of murine CTLA-4 blockade prolongs CD8-mediated anti-tumor effects following stimulatory cancer immunotherapy. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2015;64:1541-1552.

    Not in our library10.1007/s00262-015-1759-4

  225. 225.

    Verma V, et al. PD-1 blockade in subprimed CD8 cells induces dysfunctional PD-1+CD38hi cells and anti-PD-1 resistance. Nat. Immunol. 2019;20:1231-1243.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41590-019-0441-y

  226. 226.

    Joller N, Kuchroo VK. Tim-3, Lag-3, and TIGIT. Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol. 2017;410:127-156.

    Not in our library10.1007/82_2017_62

  227. 227.

    Johnson DB, et al. Ipilimumab therapy in patients with advanced melanoma and preexisting autoimmune disorders. JAMA Oncol. 2016;2:234-240.

    Not in our library10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.4368

  228. 228.

    Menzies AM, et al. Anti-PD-1 therapy in patients with advanced melanoma and preexisting autoimmune disorders or major toxicity with ipilimumab. Ann. Oncol. 2017;28:368-376.

    Not in our library10.1093/annonc/mdw443

  229. 229.

    Haanen J, et al. Management of toxicities from immunotherapy: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann. Oncol. 2017;28:iv119-iv142.

    Not in our library10.1093/annonc/mdx225

  230. 230.

    Champiat S, et al. Management of immune checkpoint blockade dysimmune toxicities: a collaborative position paper. Ann. Oncol. 2016;27:559-574.

    Not in our library10.1093/annonc/mdv623

  231. 231.

    Boutros C, et al. Safety profiles of anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 antibodies alone and in combination. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 2016;13:473-486.

    Not in our library10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.58

  232. 232.

    Postow MA, Sidlow R, Hellmann MD. Immune-related adverse events associated with immune checkpoint blockade. N. Engl. J. Med. 2018;378:158-168.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmra1703481

  233. 233.

    Wang DY, et al. Fatal toxic effects associated with immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4:1721-1728.

    Not in our library10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.3923

  234. 234.

    Routy B, et al. Gut microbiome influences efficacy of PD-1-based immunotherapy against epithelial tumors. Science. 2018;359:91-97.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aan3706

  235. 235.

    Elkrief A, Derosa L, Kroemer G, Zitvogel L, Routy B. The negative impact of antibiotics on outcomes in cancer patients treated with immunotherapy: a new independent prognostic factor? Ann. Oncol. 2019.

    Not in our library10.1093/annonc/mdz206

  236. 236.

    Vetizou M, et al. Anticancer immunotherapy by CTLA-4 blockade relies on the gut microbiota. Science. 2015;350:1079-1084.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aad1329

  237. 237.

    Torkamani A, Wineinger NE, Topol EJ. The personal and clinical utility of polygenic risk scores. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2018;19:581-590.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41576-018-0018-x

  238. 238.

    Gutierrez-Arcelus M, Rich SS, Raychaudhuri S. Autoimmune diseases—connecting risk alleles with molecular traits of the immune system. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2016;17:160-174.

    Not in our library10.1038/nrg.2015.33

  239. 239.

    Lee Y, et al. Induction and molecular signature of pathogenic TH17 cells. Nat. Immunol. 2012;13:991-999.

    Not in our library10.1038/ni.2416

  240. 240.

    Ghoreschi K, et al. Generation of pathogenic T(H)17 cells in the absence of TGF-beta signalling. Nature. 2010;467:967-971.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature09447

  241. 241.

    McGeachy MJ, et al. TGF-beta and IL-6 drive the production of IL-17 and IL-10 by T cells and restrain T(H)-17 cell-mediated pathology. Nat. Immunol. 2007;8:1390-1397.

    Not in our library10.1038/ni1539

  242. 242.

    Jager A, Dardalhon V, Sobel RA, Bettelli E, Kuchroo VK. Th1, Th17, and Th9 effector cells induce experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis with different pathological phenotypes. J. Immunol. 2009;183:7169-7177.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.0901906

  243. 243.

    Nylander, A. N. et al. Podoplanin is a negative regulator of Th17 inflammation. JCI Insight2, 10.1172/jci.insight.92321 (2017).

    Not in our library10.1172/jci.insight.92321

  244. 244.

    Peters A, et al. Podoplanin negatively regulates CD4+ effector T cell responses. J. Clin. Invest. 2015;125:129-140.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci74685

  245. 245.

    Kishi Y, et al. Protein C receptor (PROCR) is a negative regulator of Th17 pathogenicity. J. Exp. Med. 2016;213:2489-2501.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20151118

  246. 246.

    Magnuson AM, et al. Identification and validation of a tumor-infiltrating Treg transcriptional signature conserved across species and tumor types. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2018;115:E10672-E10681.

    Not in our library10.1073/pnas.1810580115

  247. 247.

    Schietinger A, et al. Tumor-specific T cell dysfunction is a dynamic antigen-driven differentiation program initiated early during tumorigenesis. Immunity. 2016;45:389-401.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.immuni.2016.07.011

  248. 248.

    Miller BC, et al. Subsets of exhausted CD8(+) T cells differentially mediate tumor control and respond to checkpoint blockade. Nat. Immunol. 2019;20:326-336.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41590-019-0312-6

  249. 249.

    Kurtulus S, et al. Checkpoint blockade immunotherapy induces dynamic changes in PD-1(-)CD8(+) tumor-infiltrating T cells. Immunity. 2019;50:181-194 e186.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.immuni.2018.11.014

  250. 250.

    Im SJ, et al. Defining CD8+ T cells that provide the proliferative burst after PD-1 therapy. Nature. 2016;537:417-421.

    Not in our library10.1038/nature19330

  251. 251.

    Wu, T. et al. The TCF1-Bcl6 axis counteracts type I interferon to repress exhaustion and maintain T cell stemness. Sci. Immunol.1, 10.1126/sciimmunol.aai8593 (2016).

    Not in our library10.1126/sciimmunol.aai8593

  252. 252.

    Siddiqui I, et al. Intratumoral Tcf1(+)PD-1(+)CD8(+) T cells with stem-like properties promote tumor control in response to vaccination and checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. Immunity. 2019;50:195-211 e110.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.immuni.2018.12.021

  253. 253.

    Brummelman J, et al. High-dimensional single cell analysis identifies stem-like cytotoxic CD8(+) T cells infiltrating human tumors. J. Exp. Med. 2018;215:2520-2535.

    Not in our library10.1084/jem.20180684

  254. 254.

    Miller BC, et al. Subsets of exhausted CD8+ T cells differentially mediate tumor control and respond to checkpoint blockade. Nat. Immunol. 2019;20:326-336.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41590-019-0312-6

  255. 255.

    Perez-Ruiz E, et al. Prophylactic TNF blockade uncouples efficacy and toxicity in dual CTLA-4 and PD-1 immunotherapy. Nature. 2019;569:428-432.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41586-019-1162-y

  256. 256.

    Willrich MA, Murray DL, Snyder MR. Tumor necrosis factor inhibitors: clinical utility in autoimmune diseases. Transl. Res. 2015;165:270-282.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.trsl.2014.09.006

  257. 257.

    Postow MA, Hellmann MD. Adverse events associated with immune checkpoint blockade. N. Engl. J. Med. 2018;378:1165.

    Not in our library10.1056/nejmra1703481

  258. 258.

    Zhang Y, et al. Hijacking antibody-induced CTLA-4 lysosomal degradation for safer and more effective cancer immunotherapy. Cell Res. 2019;29:609-627.

    Not in our library10.1038/s41422-019-0184-1

  259. 259.

    McGranahan, N. & Swanton, C. Neoantigen quality, not quantity. Sci. Transl. Med. 11 (2019).

    Not in our library10.1126/scitranslmed.aax7918

  260. 260.

    Nonomura C, et al. Identification of a neoantigen epitope in a melanoma patient with good response to anti-PD-1 antibody therapy. Immunol. Lett. 2019;208:52-59.

    Not in our library10.1016/j.imlet.2019.02.004

  261. 261.

    Chen F, et al. Neoantigen identification strategies enable personalized immunotherapy in refractory solid tumors. J. Clin. Invest. 2019;129:2056-2070.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci99538

  262. 262.

    June CH, O'Connor RS, Kawalekar OU, Ghassemi S, Milone MC. CAR T cell immunotherapy for human cancer. Science. 2018;359:1361-1365.

    Not in our library10.1126/science.aar6711

  263. 263.

    Chang CH, et al. Combination therapy with bispecific antibodies and PD-1 blockade enhances the antitumor potency of T Cells. Cancer Res. 2017;77:5384-5394.

    Not in our library10.1158/0008-5472.can-16-3431

  264. 264.

    Koopmans I, et al. A novel bispecific antibody for EGFR-directed blockade of the PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint. Oncoimmunology. 2018;7:e1466016.

    Not in our library10.1080/2162402x.2018.1466016

  265. 265.

    Messaoudene M, et al. T cell bispecific antibodies in node-positive breast cancer: novel therapeutic avenue for MHC class I loss variants. Ann. Oncol. 2019.

    Not in our library10.1093/annonc/mdz112

  266. 266.

    Pai CS, et al. Tumor-conditional anti-CTLA4 uncouples antitumor efficacy from immunotherapy-related toxicity. J. Clin. Invest. 2019;129:349-363.

    Not in our library10.1172/jci123391

  267. 267.

    Qu HQ, et al. Remapping the type I diabetes association of the CTLA4 locus. Genes Immun. 2009;10(Suppl. 1):S27-S32.

    Not in our library10.1038/gene.2009.88

  268. 268.

    Ban Y, et al. Analysis of the CTLA-4, CD28, and inducible costimulator (ICOS) genes in autoimmune thyroid disease. Genes Immun. 2003;4:586-593.

    Not in our library10.1038/sj.gene.6364018

  269. 269.

    Lei C, et al. Association of the CTLA-4 gene with rheumatoid arthritis in Chinese Han population. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 2005;13:823-828.

    Not in our library10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201423

  270. 270.

    Brahmer JR, et al. Phase I study of single-agent anti-programmed death-1 (MDX-1106) in refractory solid tumors: safety, clinical activity, pharmacodynamics, and immunologic correlates. J. Clin. Oncol. 2010;28:3167-3175.

    Not in our library10.1200/jco.2009.26.7609

  271. 271.

    Lee SY, Goverman JM. The influence of T cell Ig mucin-3 signaling on central nervous system autoimmune disease is determined by the effector function of the pathogenic T cells. J. Immunol. 2013;190:4991-4999.

    Not in our library10.4049/jimmunol.1300083

  272. 272.

    Andrews LP, Marciscano AE, Drake CG, Vignali DA. LAG3 (CD223) as a cancer immunotherapy target. Immunol. Rev. 2017;276:80-96.

    Not in our library10.1111/imr.12519

Cited by papers we hold 3

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.