Journal of Nature and Science (JNSCI), Vol.3, No.10, e460, 2017

Medical Sciences

 

Angiogenesis and Anti-tumor Immunity in the Tumor Microenvironment: Opportunities for Synergism in Intervention

 

Christopher Lemmon, Ibrahim Sadek, and Zhonglin Hao*

 

Section of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA 30912, USA


Angiogenesis inhibition and immunomodulation are successful stories of cancer therapy. However, primary and acquired resistances are common. Will combination of the two improve response rate and duration of response through synergy?  In addition to blocking neovascular formation, angiogenesis inhibitors (AI) help deliver more effective cytotoxic T lymphocytes to the tumor by improving vascular perfusion. Recent studies also showed that AI not only increased the efficacy of effector immune element but also decreased the number and function of suppressor immune cells such as T-regulatory cells, myeloid-derived suppressor cells or tumor-associated macrophages. In this review, we focus on AI and their effects on antitumor immunity in the tumor microenvironment and their potentials in boosting the efficacy of immunotherapy. In the clinical arena, trials are at the early stage to gauge the feasibility and preliminary signs of synergy.  

 

Angiogenesis inhibitor | Tumor Microenvironment | Anti-tumor immunity | Immunotherapy | Synergism

 

Introduction

Tumor angiogenesis induction refers to a process of new blood vessel formation in malignancy. It is well recognized as one of the ten hallmarks of cancer.(1) Central to this process is activation of the VEGF/VEGFR pathway, which promotes blood vessel growth and survival.(2-4)  Blockade of this pathway not only inhibits angiogenesis and destroys tumor vasculature, but also normalizes tumor blood vessels.(4-6) Indeed VEGF blockade is fundamental to most of AI currently in use for cancer treatment including lung, renal, colon, pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.(7) However, like many other inhibitors used in cancer therapy, efficacy is generally short-lived.

Immune checkpoint mechanisms involving CTLA-4 / B7-1/2 and PD-1/PD-L1 /2 ligation (8) are used by the cancer cells to achieve immune evasion, another hallmark of cancer.(1) Inhibitors against CTLA-4, PD-1, PD-L1 proved to be effective in a variety of cancer types including melanoma, lung, renal cell, bladder, colon, lymphoma, head and neck etc. However, with single agent treatment, the response is less than 20% with most of them not durable except melanoma. Although the low response rate can at least be partially improved by further immune checkpoint combination use of CTLA-4 and PD-1 inhibitors, the response rate for the combination ranged between 25-60% (9, 10) in lung cancer and melanoma. It is still not clear how long the response will be maintained. However this combination produces an unacceptable level of grade 3 and 4 toxicities in many patients.(9, 10) Other immunosuppressive forces in the tumor microenvironment might explain the low response/escape and short duration of response. With emerging evidences pointing out to a role of immunosuppression by the pro-angiogenic forces, we highlight in this review how AI might contribute to the formation of a microenvironment favoring antitumor immunity and potentially boost immunotherapy.

 

Suppressive Immune Cells in the Tumor Microenvironment

Tumor microenvironment (TME) describes a tissue environment in which a tumor exists. Inside the TME, tumor cells interact with the host immune system and stromal surroundings.(11) Tumor growth is also affected by metabolites that influence the pro- or anti-tumor forces surrounding the tumor cells. TME is both impacted by and has impacts on anti-neoplastic therapies including immunotherapy. Here we focus on the immunosuppressive cells that exert crucial influence over antitumor immunity. The cell population mentioned here include T-regulatory cells (Tregs), myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), and the M2 (tumor-tolerant) tumor associated macrophages (TAMs), which act under the direction of the tumor to assist in suppression of antitumor immunity, and allow for propagation of the tumor.(12)

 

T Regulatory Cells

Tregs are a population of CD4+ CD25+ FoxP3+ T cells that suppress the proliferation of the activated immune system and maintain immune tolerance to self-antigens. Tregs participate in antitumor immunity, allowing the tumor evasion in epithelial malignancies.(13) Tregs activities are upregulated in the TME, where increased number of Tregs correlated with a poor prognosis in epithelial cancers.  Increased numbers of Tregs in the peripheral blood and Treg infiltration in the tumor have also been observed in murine tumor models and in patients with cancer.(14, 15) Tregs depletion dramatically enhances the effect of immunotherapy in murine tumor models but similar approaches have not been effective in patients with cancer.(16) Tregs inhibit the function of tumor specific T cells, particularly in the TME, and their elimination allows antigen-specific T cells to proliferate more robustly. Treg-mediated immune suppression may in part explain the poor clinical response of some cancer patients undergoing immunotherapy.  There is a positive correlation in murine models and in patients treated with ipilimumab between the CD8 effector to Tregs cell ratio in the TME and tumor response (17-20). Agents that increase this ratio are associated with improved tumor control.

In three models of lung cancer (a Kras mutation, a carcinogen-driven and a transgenic model), depletion of Tregs with rapamycin, or antibody or genetic ablation, reduced lung tumorigenesis by 90%, 80% and 75% respectively(21). It was observed that Tregs exhibited high suppressive activity and this activity increased with tumor stage of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).(22) In a retrospective analysis of 87 surgically resected NSCLC specimens, it was found that patients with high Tregs counts had significantly worse prognosis in terms of relapse free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).(23) Compared with healthy individuals, NSCLC patients have increased number of Tregs in their peripheral blood. The increase in Tregs number correlated with stage, with higher levels of Tregs observed in more advanced stages (IV>III>II).(24).

 

Myeloid Derived Suppressor Cells

      Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) are a heterogeneous population of immature myeloid cells differentiated from common myeloid progenitor cells, which also give rise to granulocytes, dendritic cells and monocytes. Phenotypically, they are CD11b+ CD14 CD15+ HLA-DRlow/ CD33+ (PMN-MDSC) or CD11b+ CD14+ CD15 IL4R+ HLA-DRlow CD33+ (MO-MDSCs) in humans and are of CD11b+ Ly6C Ly6G+ (PMN-MDSCs) or CD11b+ Ly6C+ Ly6Glow/ (MO-MDSC) in mouse.(25) Identified in the mid-1980s, they were found to inhibit innate and adaptive immunity, suppress T cell proliferation and generation of cytotoxic T lymphocytes in an antigen independent manner.(26)

Inflammation, whether therapy-induced or tumor-associated, has been known to promote carcinogenesis and tumor growth. Developed under the influence of pro-inflammatory cytokines such as IL-1b, IL-6 and PGE2, MDSCs provide a link between inflammation and carcinogenesis/tumor growth.(27, 28) Tumor and host cells in the TME are able to produce various pro-inflammatory mediators. These mediators activate MDSCs and drive MDSC accumulation and suppressive activity. MDSC can also secrete VEGF and VEGF drives MDSC accumulation forming a positive feedback loop.(29, 30) ROS inside the MDSC drives expression of VEGFR by MDSC. Increased expression of VEGFR further serves as chemo-attractant for MDSCs and ligation of VEGFR receptor also promotes angiogenesis.(31)

MDSCs utilize a variety of mechanisms to suppress T cell activation, induce immune-suppressive cell populations, and regulate inflammation in the TME.(25) Infiltration of MDSCs also promotes tumor cell epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT). EMT is an important mechanism that fosters metastatic potential and allows for vascular mimicry. Vascular mimicry refers to the development of VEGF-independent microvascular structures that are not composed of endothelial cells, but rather tumor cells, and interconnect with the tumor vascular circuit to allow an alternative mechanism of oxygen and nutrient delivery.(32, 33)

MDSCs have been isolated from patients with solid tumors. Tumor subtypes ranged from breast cancer,(34, 35) head and neck squamous cell carcinoma,(36) non-small cell lung cancer(37) colon and rectal cancer,(38) renal cell carcinoma,(39) bladder cancer,(40) gastrointestinal cancer,(41) pancreatic adeno-carcinoma,(42) esophageal cancer,(43) prostate cancer,(44) to urothelial tract cancer(36) among others. Patients with multiple myeloma and non-Hodgkins lymphoma also exhibit elevated levels of MDSCs in their blood.(45, 46) Their MDSC levels directly correlated with clinical cancer stage and metastatic burden. Importantly, increased populations of MDSC were predictive of poor initial response to conventional treatments, have demonstrated shortened progression free survival (PFS), and predicted poor outcomes, with a recent meta-analysis showing significant effects on overall survival (OS) in patients with solid tumors.(47-49)

 

Tumor Associated Macrophages

Tumor associated macrophages (TAM) refer to macrophages present in the TME. Blood monocytes become macrophages once outside the blood vessel at the site of inflammation or tumor. Despite their normal role of promoting both innate and adaptive immunity and phagocytosis of dead cells and cell debris, they can be converted by the tumor to a phenotype that promotes tumor growth and metastasis. When this happens, macrophage M1 phenotype is converted to M2. Therefore M1 is the classically activated macrophage and they are pro-inflammatory, anti-tumor and pro-immunity whereas M2 is alternatively activated macrophages that are anti-inflammatory, pro-tumor and immune-suppressive in nature.(50)

Tumor cells entry into the blood stream is facilitated by TAMs in contact with the blood vessels thus TAMs promote tumor metastasis.(51) TAMs and MDSCs have also been shown to be able to directly incorporate into the endothelial wall to allow an alternative mechanism for vessel formation that does not rely on endothelial cells.(33)  TAMs promote tumor growth by down-regulating both adaptive and innate immunity through secretion of many immunosuppressive cytokines or metabolites such as TGF-, IL-10, arginase 1 and nitric oxide(52) and through interaction with MDSCs. The Tie2 expressing TAMs are pro-angiogenic. They promote tumor growth and recovery from cancer treatment with chemo/radiation.(53, 54) The extent of TAM infiltration into the tumor negatively affects the outcome of cancer.(55) TAM dampens the efficacy and response of cancer treatment by promoting angiogenesis and suppressing antitumor immunity.(53) Cancer treatment including chemo/radiation promotes accumulation of bone marrow MDSC. MDSC then differentiate into TAMs in treated tumors.(56-58) Depleting TAM by suppressing conversion of M1 to M2 phenotype or blocking entry of macrophages into the tumor improves cancer treatment response.(59)

 

VEGF and Hypoxia in the Tumor Microenvironment

VEGF plays a central role in angiogenesis. In addition, it has complex interactions with the immune environment via hypoxia mediated signaling effects,(60) by direct impairment of antigen presentation mechanisms and dendritic cell maturation, by preventing propagation of the inflammatory signals and VEGFR ligation on MDSCs, Tregs, TAMs, and CTLs, to further support an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment.(61)

Hypoxia has been shown to promote immune checkpoint molecule programmed-cell-death-ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression to allow further protect the tumor from the immune system.(62) It also causes PI3K/Akt/mTOR activation via HIF-1a mediated intracellular accumulation of adenosine, which ultimately leads to upregulation of immunosuppressive cytokines and immune checkpoint markers, while also stimulating angiogenesis.(63)

 

Effects of AI on Antitumor Immunity Immunogenic Modulation

The mechanisms for the immunomodulating effects of anti-angiogenic therapies are emerging, and many studies described beneficial effects of AI and immunotherapy, using either vaccine or checkpoint inhibitor therapy to re-ignite the immune system.(64-66)

Small molecule TKIs have been shown to have immunomodulating effects due to their effects on immunosuppressive MDSCs as well as their anti-angiogenic effect to functionally normalize tumor vasculature, providing an improved environment for an active immune response. (67, 68) The improved T-cell response appears to be a dual response to blockade of VEGF binding to Tregs, directly influencing Tregs apoptosis to reduce their immunosuppressive potential(69) while also releasing suppression of NFkB to restore transcription of pro-inflammatory mediators and chemokines that in turn causes an increase in cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTL) infiltration and activity.(70) This same effect has been observed with bevacizumab.(71) Interestingly, inhibition of Treg function rendered previously resistant tumors sensitive to treatment with anti-VEGF antibodies again.(72) Importantly, the decrease in Tregs was shown to have a beneficial effect on overall survival.(73)

Treatment with a VEGFR2 antibody was found to increase the population of M1 (immunoactive) TAMs and tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), and when it is combined with vaccine therapy, lead to increased CTL killing in both immunogenic and immune exhausted cancer models.(64) Other studies showed that treatment with an anti-Gr1+ antibody targeting MDSCs in combination with an anti-VEGF antibody showed improved tumor inhibition than either agent alone.(74)

While these AI may cause infiltration of immune cells initially, the CTLs that are activated are counteracted by increased expression of PD-L1 in the TME leading to exhaustion.(75) Dendritic cells (DC) with an enhanced immunologic phenotype were also found to be down-regulated by the tumor immune environment to a tolerant phenotype.(76) Since immune checkpoint inhibitors do well in reversing such tolerant state, combination use of AI with immune checkpoint inhibitors may curb AI resistance. Both sunitinib (77) and sorafenib (78) have been shown to decrease expression of these checkpoint inhibitors in certain tumor populations to allow for an active immune response (see below).

 

TME conditioning

The functionally and structurally abnormal tumor vasculature is characterized by leaky pericyte coverage, allowing for increased tumor cell transmigration, increased interstitial fluid pressure, and with tortuous, irregular, and blunted branch points creating a turbulent and heterogeneous flow that allows for maintenance of the hypoxic and immunosuppressive environment and limits delivery of therapeutics.(79)

In addition to the direct effects on the immune system, anti-angiogenic treatment causes changes in this abnormal vessel structure, permeability, and stability. All these can improve the hypoxic conditions of the TME,(80) reverse the impaired immune response and help the delivery of therapeutics to the tumor site,(81) including improvement to utility of adoptive immune transfer and vaccine therapy.(82) One of the many studies investigating this compared both bevacizumab and pazopanib (a VEGFR2 TKI) in colorectal cancer. The interventions yielded decreased interstitial fluid pressure to allow for increased chemotherapy penetration to the tumor.(83)

 

Effects of individual antiangiogenic agents on antitumor immunity

Bevacizumab

Bevacizumab is a humanized monoclonal antibody against VEGF and approved by the FDA for metastatic NSCLC, colon cancer among others. In an orthotopic xenograft model of breast cancer, antibodies that blocked VEGF binding to VEGFR2 were associated with decreased infiltration of TAM and reduced tumor microvessel density.(84)  Similarly in a breast cancer model, low dose anti-VEGFR2 antibody normalized tumor vascularity and changed macrophage polarity from the M2 phenotype to M1 and facilitated CD4+ and CD8+ T cell infiltration whereas high doses did not produce this effect.(64)  This study suggests that lower dose might be preferred rather than high dose given the fact that high dose did not result in improved overall survival in combination with chemotherapy in breast cancer. Bevacizumab reduced VEGF levels in a malignant pleural effusion. It was also associated with a decrease in Treg that expressed high levels of VEGFR2. Additional confirmatory  work demonstrated that VEGFA/ VEGFR blockade with bevacizumab or sunitinib inhibited tumor induced Treg proliferation in the CT26 mouse model of colorectal cancer.(85)  Colon cancer patients treated with bevacizumab and chemotherapy showed lower Treg numbers following treatment than those treated with chemotherapy alone. Bevacizumab was also tested for its effects on Tregs in peripheral blood of patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) in combination with IL-2 and chemotherapy.(86) Among the 51 patients treated in the phase II part, it was found that Tregs rapidly increased after IL-2 treatment in all patients, and bevacizumab decreased their number but only in patients who had clinical benefit with no disease progression (including stable disease, 37% or partial response, 29.5%). In colon cancer treated with bevacizumab and FOLFIRI, responders had greater decrease in Tregs and decreased Treg frequency was associated with better PFS and OS.(87) In stage IV NSCLC patients, MDSC counts in the peripheral blood were significantly lower in those who had received chemotherapy with bevacizumab compared to those with chemotherapy only. On disease progression, MDSC numbers were again much higher, suggesting that bevacizumab efficacy correlates well with downregulation of MDSC.(88) This appears to be true also in colon cancer treated with bevacizumab with the FOLFOX regimen,(89) where accumulation of MDSC predicted the efficacy of FOLFOX-Bev regimen among the 25 patients treated. The control group had 20 healthy individuals.

 

Sunitinib

Sunitinib is a multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGFRs and PDGFR. Like axitinib, sunitinib synergized with folate-hapten mediated immunotherapy in 3 murine models of cancer through blocking TAM, MDSC which secrete VEGF and promote neovascularization.(90) Sunitinib treatment also reprogramed TAM towards classically activated macrophages in a RCC model.(91)

Sunitinib also down-regulates the immunosuppressive effects mediated by the MDSC in man and animal models of cancer. Comparison of the number of peripheral blood MDSC in RCC patients showed that sunitinib treatment reduced MDSC and caused reversal of type 1 T cell response suppression. Type-1 T cell response (IFN-g) is critical for the generation of effective antitumor immunity along with a reduction in the development of a type 2 cytokine bias.(92) The scenario could be reproduced in vitro by depletion of MDSC. In a RCC model, sunitinib pretreatment improves TIL expansion by reducing intratumoral MDSC (68). The reduction of MDSC in response to sunitinib treatment also correlated with a reduction of  Treg cells.(93) Importantly immune checkpoint molecules CTLA-4, PD-1 expression in both CD4 and CD8 T cells and PD-L1 expression on MDSC and DC were also significantly reduced by sunitinib treatment.(77) In the human glioma model, treatment with sunitinib decreased the infiltration of MDSC in the tumor and prolonged the survival of tumor carrying animals.(70, 94) In the melanoma B16F10 and fibrosarcoma T241 models, sunitinib enhanced the antitumor response of CD40 antibody by reducing MDSC and improving endothelial cell and T cell recruitment.(70) Sunitinib also enhanced the effects of therapeutic cancer vaccine and stereotactic radiation therapy through modulation of MDSC.(95) A decrease of intratumoral and peripheral blood Tregs correlated with OS in mRCC treated with sunitinib.(96) VEGFA/VEGFR blockade inhibited tumor induced Treg proliferation in colon cancer.(85) Hence, sunitinib can be a valuable tool for boosting antitumor effects where MDSC/Treg mediated immunosuppression is crucial.

Results of a randomized controlled trial COMPARZ showed that subjects with RCC receiving sunitinib and pazopanib had significant shorter OS (15.1m vs 35.5m for sunitinib and 15.3 m vs 27.8 m for pazopanib) when increased PD-L1 expression is found in the tumor,(97) suggesting that increased PD-L1 expression might be associated with resistance and PD-1 blockade might improve the outcome of these patients with increased PD-L1 expression.

To test potential synergy between sunitinib and tremelimumab, the two agents were combined in a phase 1 clinical trial. (98) Tremelimumab was given in three cohorts of 6mg/kg, 10 mg/kg, and 15 mg/kg every 12 weeks, and sunitinib was given either continuously at 37.5 mg daily or at 50 mg for four weeks and off for two weeks. Unexpectedly, too much toxicities including one sudden death were observed in all cohort. Rapid onset renal failure happened in 9/21 patients receiving 10 mg/kg of tremelimumab and 37.5 mg daily of sunitinib. Further investigation of this combination in human was deemed too toxic.  

In a phase 2 trial clinical trial involving metastatic renal cell carcinoma, OS was found to be associated T cell response to IMA901, a ten tumor associated peptide vaccine. Potential synergy between sunitinib and the vaccine was tested in a phase 3 trial named IMPRINT.(99) A total of 339  patients having either locally advanced or metastatic clear cell carcinoma were randomized to receive either sunitinib plus IMA901 (N=204) or sunitinib (N=135) alone. With a median follow up of 33.27 month, no difference was observed between the two groups in terms of mOS, which was the primary end point (HR 1.34).

To study the effects of angiogenesis inhibitor on immunosuppressive TME, researchers studied 33 healthy kidneys, 41 untreated primary RCCs, and 42 bevacizumab-pretreated and 39 sunitinib-pretreated primary RCC(75). In comparison to normal healthy kidney tissue, RCC have significantly more CD3+, CD4+, CD45RO+, CD8+ lymphocytes and CD68+ macrophages infiltration. The infiltration of lymphocytes and macrophages was even higher in sunitinib-treated compared to control RCC specimens. Bevacizumab-treated kidneys had increased lymphocytes but not macrophages. Interestingly, CD4+ / CD8+ T-lymphocyte infiltration was inversely correlated with OS and PFS in patients treated with AI therapy. In patients who were not treated, no obvious correlation was observed between CD4+ T-lymphocyte infiltration and OS or PFS. These results collectively indicate that a preexisting immunosuppressive TME inhibited or subverted the antitumor function of T cells. When T lymphocytes infiltration increased, Treg infiltration also increased. Interestingly; Treg can attract CD8+ T lymphocytes to their vasinity and suppress CD8+ T lymphocytes function (100). CD8+ T-lymphocyte infiltration correlated very well with Treg infiltration (R=0.799). Furthermore, PD-L1 expression increased with antiangiogenic therapy.  The correlation between CD8+ T-lymphocyte infiltration and PD-L1 expression in sunitinib-treated samples was also high (R=0.725).  This study suggests that antiangiogenic therapy may be insufficient to mount an effector T-cell response capable of overcoming the immunosuppressive TME and combination use of sunitinib with checkpoint inhibitors or drugs that inhibit Tregs may boost the efficacy of antiangiogenic maneuver.

 

Sorafenib

Sorafenib is a multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGFR/PDGFR. It also target RAF/MEK/ERK pathway. In a murine hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) model, MDSC and Treg increased with tumor burden. Sorafenib decreased the immunosuppressive MDSC and Tregs.(101) Low dose of sorafenib was sufficient to suppress Treg function and promote the CD4+ effector cells.(102) In 45 patients treated with sorafenib for 4 weeks, Tregs were decreased in patients taking 400 mg and 800 mg a day while no changes in T effector cells and Th1 cells were found.(103) In a study that included 19 patients with advanced HCC, researchers found high levels of immunosuppressive cell infiltrate in HCC patients compared with healthy controls. Sorafenib reduce the number of Tregs, MDSC, and PD-1+ exhausted T cells.(78) Decrease in PD-1 expression on T cells and Treg number were correlated with improved OS in patients following sorafenib treatment.  The high pretreatment levels of immunosuppressive cell infiltration significantly correlated with achievement of better OS in patients, suggesting that higher pretreatment numbers of these cells represent predictive immune correlates of responsiveness to sorafenib treatment. The study result suggests that sorafenib may enhance the therapeutic effects of checkpoint blockade. In another study, sorafenib enhanced the antitumor effects of anti-CTLA-4 antibody by inhibiting MDSC in a murine cancer model.(104)

It is worth mentioning here that although sunitinib and sorafenib seemingly target similar receptors, sunitinib is not effective in cancer harboring KRAS or BRAF mutations (105) whereas sorafenib does target BRAF/KRAS suggesting the subtle difference in target selection maybe behind the effects on immunosuppression Tregs and PD-1 expression in clinical trials.

 

Axitinib

Axitinib targets VEGFR1, 2, 3. Axitinib treated recurrent GBM is associated with increased Tregs and T cell exhaustion with increased expression of PD-L1 in CD4 and CD8 T cells on progression from treatment, pointing out PD-L1 expression as possible mechanism of escape from angiogenic inhibition.(106) In mouse model of melanoma, axitinib decreased MDSC and increased CD8 T cells without affecting Tregs.(107) Similarly Axitinib together with CTLA-4 antibody improved intratumoral DC function and CD4+ CD8+ T Cell function at the same time causing MDSC suppression in a melanoma brain metastasis mouse model.(108) Axitinib and sunitinib were able to synergize with folate-hapten mediated immunotherapy in three syngeneic murine model of renal cell (Renca), NSCLC (M109) and lymphocytic leukemia (L1210A) through blocking of TAM, MDSC releasing/secreting VEGF, which promote neovascularization.(90)

 

Cabozantinib

Cabozantinib is a kinase inhibitor targeting VEGFR2/MET and one of the two drugs tested as AI in prostate cancer.(109) Combination of cabozantinib or BEZ235 with PD-1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors had remarkable synergy compared to cabozantinib or PD-1 and CTLA-4 inhibitors alone which had minimal impact on tumor growth in a chimeric mouse model of castration refractory prostate cancer model (mCRPC).(110) MDSC targeting was felt to be the key.

 

 

Conclusion

Immunotherapy with the checkpoint blockade has emerged as an effective way to restore antitumor immunity and terminate escape in the TME in a variety of cancers. However, innate and adaptive resistances are common and postulated to be related to the immune suppressive cells among others. Angiogenesis inhibition, another effective treatment for advanced cancer by targeting VEGF/VEGFR and restore normal vasculature, has the added benefit of immunoediting in the TME through down-regulating the function of suppressive immune cells. It is expected that combined use of these two classes of drugs will delay emergency of resistance, improve response rate and hopefully survival. Clinical trials addressing the tolerability of the combination and the efficacy are under way (refer to table 1 for ongoing clinical trials combining pembrolizumab with AI registered in clinicaltrials.gov). 

 


 

Table I.  Ongoing clinical trials in combination with pembrolizumab

AI in combo

Patient#

Cancer type

Phase

Primary Objective

NCT#

Status

Bev

53

Melanoma

NSCLC

2

BMRR

02681549

Recruiting

 

Bev/XRT

42

H.G. Glioma

1

MTD

02313272

Recruiting

 

Bev/CPE

40

Ovarian; Fallopian, Peritoneal

2

PFS,      Tolerability

02853318

Recruiting

 

+/-Bev

82

GBM

2

PFS, MTD

02337491

Not Rec

 

Bev

61

RCC

1b/2

MTD, Efficacy

02348008

Not Rec

 

Axitinib

60

RCC

1b

DLT

02133742

Not Rec

 

Axitinib

840

RCC

3

PFS, OS

02853331

Recruiting

 

Axitinib

30

Alveolar soft part, STS

2

PFS

02636725

Recruiting

 

cabozantinib

55

RCC

1/2

ORR

03149822

Not yet

 

 

BMRR: Brain metastasis response rate; CPE: Cyclophosphamide; DLT: dose limiting toxicity; H.G. High grade; MTD: maximum tolerated dosage; Not Rec: active, not recruiting; ORR: overall response rate; STS: soft tissue sarcoma; XRT: radiation therapy.

 

Abbreviations

AI: angiogenesis inhibitor; Bev: Bevacizumab; mCRPC: metastatic castration refractory prostate cancer; CTLA-4: cytotoxic T lymphocyte associated antigen-4; CD: Cluster of differentiation; DC: dendritic cells; EMT: epithelial to mesenchymal transition; ERK: extracellular regulated kinase; FDA: food and drug administration; FOLFOX: fluorouracil leucovorin oxaliplatin; FOLFIRI: fluorouracil leucovorin irinotecan; FOX-P3: fork head box P3;  GBM: Glioblastoma multiforme; HCC: hepatocellular carcinoma; HIF-1a: hypoxia inducible factor-1a; IL: Interleukin; MDSC: myeloid derived suppressor cell; MEK: mitogen activated extracellular response kinase ; MO: monocytic; MET:  mesenchymal epithelial transformation (receptor tyrosine kinase);  OS: overall survival; PD-1: programmed death-1; PD-L1 Programmed death ligand-1; PFS: progression free survival; PGE: prostaglandin E; PI3K: Phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase; PMN: polymorphoneutrophil; RAF: Raf gene; mRCC: metastatic renal cell carcinoma; RFS: relapse free survival; ROS: reactive oxygen species; TAM: tumor associated macrophage; TIL: tumor infiltrating lymphocytes; TKI: tyrosine kinase inhibitor; TME: Tumor microenvironment; mTOR: mammalian target of rapamycin; Treg: T regulatory cells; VEGF(R): vascular endothelial growth factor (receptor).

 

References


1.   Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell. 2011 Mar 04;144(5):646-74. PubMed PMID: 21376230.

2.   Ferrara N, Kerbel RS. Angiogenesis as a therapeutic target. Nature. 2005 Dec 15;438(7070):967-74. PubMed PMID: 16355214.

3.   Ferrara N, Mass RD, Campa C, Kim R. Targeting VEGF-A to treat cancer and age-related macular degeneration. Annu Rev Med. 2007;58:491-504. PubMed PMID: 17052163.

4.   Ellis LM, Hicklin DJ. VEGF-targeted therapy: mechanisms of anti-tumour activity. Nat Rev Cancer. 2008 Aug;8(8):579-91. PubMed PMID: 18596824.

5.   Inai T, Mancuso M, Hashizume H, Baffert F, Haskell A, Baluk P, et al. Inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling in cancer causes loss of endothelial fenestrations, regression of tumor vessels, and appearance of basement membrane ghosts. Am J Pathol. 2004 Jul;165(1):35-52. PubMed PMID: 15215160. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC1618540.

6.   Jain RK. Normalization of tumor vasculature: an emerging concept in antiangiogenic therapy. Science. 2005 Jan 07;307(5706):58-62. PubMed PMID: 15637262.

7.   Sennino B, McDonald DM. Controlling escape from angiogenesis inhibitors. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012 Oct;12(10):699-709. PubMed PMID: 23001349. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3969886.

8.   Pardoll DM. The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2012 Mar 22;12(4):252-64. PubMed PMID: 22437870. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC4856023.

9.   D'Angelo SP, Larkin J, Sosman JA, Lebbe C, Brady B, Neyns B, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Nivolumab Alone or in Combination With Ipilimumab in Patients With Mucosal Melanoma: A Pooled Analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2017 Jan 10;35(2):226-35. PubMed PMID: 28056206.

10. Hellmann MD, Rizvi NA, Goldman JW, Gettinger SN, Borghaei H, Brahmer JR, et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab as first-line treatment for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 012): results of an open-label, phase 1, multicohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2017 Jan;18(1):31-41. PubMed PMID: 27932067.

11. Albini A, Sporn MB. The tumour microenvironment as a target for chemoprevention. Nat Rev Cancer. 2007 Feb;7(2):139-47. PubMed PMID: 17218951.

12. Quail DF, Joyce JA. Microenvironmental regulation of tumor progression and metastasis. Nat Med. 2013 Nov;19(11):1423-37. PubMed PMID: 24202395. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3954707.

13. Gabrilovich DI, Nagaraj S. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells as regulators of the immune system. Nat Rev Immunol. 2009 Mar;9(3):162-74. PubMed PMID: 19197294. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2828349.

14. Curiel TJ, Coukos G, Zou L, Alvarez X, Cheng P, Mottram P, et al. Specific recruitment of regulatory T cells in ovarian carcinoma fosters immune privilege and predicts reduced survival. Nat Med. 2004 Sep;10(9):942-9. PubMed PMID: 15322536.

15. Liyanage UK, Moore TT, Joo HG, Tanaka Y, Herrmann V, Doherty G, et al. Prevalence of regulatory T cells is increased in peripheral blood and tumor microenvironment of patients with pancreas or breast adenocarcinoma. J Immunol. 2002 Sep 01;169(5):2756-61. PubMed PMID: 12193750.

16. Sutmuller RP, van Duivenvoorde LM, van Elsas A, Schumacher TN, Wildenberg ME, Allison JP, et al. Synergism of cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 blockade and depletion of CD25(+) regulatory T cells in antitumor therapy reveals alternative pathways for suppression of autoreactive cytotoxic T lymphocyte responses. J Exp Med. 2001 Sep 17;194(6):823-32. PubMed PMID: 11560997. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2195955.

17. Peggs KS, Quezada SA, Allison JP. Cancer immunotherapy: co-stimulatory agonists and co-inhibitory antagonists. Clin Exp Immunol. 2009 Jul;157(1):9-19. PubMed PMID: 19659765. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2710587.

18. Peggs KS, Quezada SA, Chambers CA, Korman AJ, Allison JP. Blockade of CTLA-4 on both effector and regulatory T cell compartments contributes to the antitumor activity of anti-CTLA-4 antibodies. J Exp Med. 2009 Aug 03;206(8):1717-25. PubMed PMID: 19581407. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2722174.

19. Simpson TR, Li F, Montalvo-Ortiz W, Sepulveda MA, Bergerhoff K, Arce F, 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 Aug 26;210(9):1695-710. PubMed PMID: 23897981. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3754863.

20. Quezada SA, Peggs KS, Simpson TR, Allison JP. Shifting the equilibrium in cancer immunoediting: from tumor tolerance to eradication. Immunol Rev. 2011 May;241(1):104-18. PubMed PMID: 21488893. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3727276.

21. Granville CA, Memmott RM, Balogh A, Mariotti J, Kawabata S, Han W, et al. A central role for Foxp3+ regulatory T cells in K-Ras-driven lung tumorigenesis. PLoS One. 2009;4(3):e5061. PubMed PMID: 19330036. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2659439.

22. Ju S, Qiu H, Zhou X, Zhu B, Lv X, Huang X, et al. CD13+CD4+CD25hi regulatory T cells exhibit higher suppressive function and increase with tumor stage in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Cell Cycle. 2009 Aug 15;8(16):2578-85. PubMed PMID: 19597336.

23. Tao H, Mimura Y, Aoe K, Kobayashi S, Yamamoto H, Matsuda E, et al. Prognostic potential of FOXP3 expression in non-small cell lung cancer cells combined with tumor-infiltrating regulatory T cells. Lung Cancer. 2012 Jan;75(1):95-101. PubMed PMID: 21719142.

24. Erfani N, Mehrabadi SM, Ghayumi MA, Haghshenas MR, Mojtahedi Z, Ghaderi A, et al. Increase of regulatory T cells in metastatic stage and CTLA-4 over expression in lymphocytes of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Lung Cancer. 2012 Aug;77(2):306-11. PubMed PMID: 22608141.

25. Parker KH, Beury DW, Ostrand-Rosenberg S. Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells: Critical Cells Driving Immune Suppression in the Tumor Microenvironment. Advances in cancer research. 2015;128:95-139. PubMed PMID: 26216631. Pubmed Central PMCID: 4662416.

26. Strober S. Natural suppressor (NS) cells, neonatal tolerance, and total lymphoid irradiation: exploring obscure relationships. Annu Rev Immunol. 1984;2:219-37. PubMed PMID: 6152690.

27. Zong WX, Thompson CB. Necrotic death as a cell fate. Genes Dev. 2006 Jan 01;20(1):1-15. PubMed PMID: 16391229.

28. Zitvogel L, Apetoh L, Ghiringhelli F, Kroemer G. Immunological aspects of cancer chemotherapy. Nat Rev Immunol. 2008 Jan;8(1):59-73. PubMed PMID: 18097448.

29. Gabrilovich D, Ishida T, Oyama T, Ran S, Kravtsov V, Nadaf S, et al. Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibits the development of dendritic cells and dramatically affects the differentiation of multiple hematopoietic lineages in vivo. Blood. 1998 Dec 01;92(11):4150-66. PubMed PMID: 9834220.

30. Kujawski M, Kortylewski M, Lee H, Herrmann A, Kay H, Yu H. Stat3 mediates myeloid cell-dependent tumor angiogenesis in mice. J Clin Invest. 2008 Oct;118(10):3367-77. PubMed PMID: 18776941. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2528912.

31. Kusmartsev S, Eruslanov E, Kubler H, Tseng T, Sakai Y, Su Z, et al. Oxidative stress regulates expression of VEGFR1 in myeloid cells: link to tumor-induced immune suppression in renal cell carcinoma. J Immunol. 2008 Jul 01;181(1):346-53. PubMed PMID: 18566400.

32. Toh B, Wang X, Keeble J, Sim WJ, Khoo K, Wong WC, et al. Mesenchymal transition and dissemination of cancer cells is driven by myeloid-derived suppressor cells infiltrating the primary tumor. PLoS Biol. 2011 Sep;9(9):e1001162. PubMed PMID: 21980263. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3181226.

33. Fan YL, Zheng M, Tang YL, Liang XH. A new perspective of vasculogenic mimicry: EMT and cancer stem cells (Review). Oncol Lett. 2013 Nov;6(5):1174-80. PubMed PMID: 24179490. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3813799.

34. Alizadeh D, Trad M, Hanke NT, Larmonier CB, Janikashvili N, Bonnotte B, et al. Doxorubicin eliminates myeloid-derived suppressor cells and enhances the efficacy of adoptive T-cell transfer in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2014 Jan 01;74(1):104-18. PubMed PMID: 24197130. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3896092.

35. Diaz-Montero CM, Salem ML, Nishimura MI, Garrett-Mayer E, Cole DJ, Montero AJ. Increased circulating myeloid-derived suppressor cells correlate with clinical cancer stage, metastatic tumor burden, and doxorubicin-cyclophosphamide chemotherapy. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2009 Jan;58(1):49-59. PubMed PMID: 18446337. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3401888.

36. Brandau S, Trellakis S, Bruderek K, Schmaltz D, Steller G, Elian M, et al. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in the peripheral blood of cancer patients contain a subset of immature neutrophils with impaired migratory properties. J Leukoc Biol. 2011 Feb;89(2):311-7. PubMed PMID: 21106641.

37. Huang A, Zhang B, Wang B, Zhang F, Fan KX, Guo YJ. Increased CD14(+)HLA-DR (-/low) myeloid-derived suppressor cells correlate with extrathoracic metastasis and poor response to chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2013 Sep;62(9):1439-51. PubMed PMID: 23760662.

38. OuYang LY, Wu XJ, Ye SB, Zhang RX, Li ZL, Liao W, et al. Tumor-induced myeloid-derived suppressor cells promote tumor progression through oxidative metabolism in human colorectal cancer. J Transl Med. 2015 Feb 01;13:47. PubMed PMID: 25638150. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC4357065.

39. Rodriguez PC, Ernstoff MS, Hernandez C, Atkins M, Zabaleta J, Sierra R, et al. Arginase I-producing myeloid-derived suppressor cells in renal cell carcinoma are a subpopulation of activated granulocytes. Cancer Res. 2009 Feb 15;69(4):1553-60. PubMed PMID: 19201693. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2900845.

40. Eruslanov E, Neuberger M, Daurkin I, Perrin GQ, Algood C, Dahm P, et al. Circulating and tumor-infiltrating myeloid cell subsets in patients with bladder cancer. Int J Cancer. 2012 Mar 01;130(5):1109-19. PubMed PMID: 21480223.

41. Wang L, Chang EW, Wong SC, Ong SM, Chong DQ, Ling KL. Increased myeloid-derived suppressor cells in gastric cancer correlate with cancer stage and plasma S100A8/A9 proinflammatory proteins. J Immunol. 2013 Jan 15;190(2):794-804. PubMed PMID: 23248262.

42. Porembka MR, Mitchem JB, Belt BA, Hsieh CS, Lee HM, Herndon J, et al. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma induces bone marrow mobilization of myeloid-derived suppressor cells which promote primary tumor growth. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2012 Sep;61(9):1373-85. PubMed PMID: 22215137. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3697836.

43. Gabitass RF, Annels NE, Stocken DD, Pandha HA, Middleton GW. Elevated myeloid-derived suppressor cells in pancreatic, esophageal and gastric cancer are an independent prognostic factor and are associated with significant elevation of the Th2 cytokine interleukin-13. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2011 Oct;60(10):1419-30. PubMed PMID: 21644036. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3176406.

44. Vuk-Pavlovic S, Bulur PA, Lin Y, Qin R, Szumlanski CL, Zhao X, et al. Immunosuppressive CD14+HLA-DRlow/- monocytes in prostate cancer. Prostate. 2010 Mar 01;70(4):443-55. PubMed PMID: 19902470. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2935631.

45. Brimnes MK, Vangsted AJ, Knudsen LM, Gimsing P, Gang AO, Johnsen HE, et al. Increased level of both CD4+FOXP3+ regulatory T cells and CD14+HLA-DR(-)/low myeloid-derived suppressor cells and decreased level of dendritic cells in patients with multiple myeloma. Scand J Immunol. 2010 Dec;72(6):540-7. PubMed PMID: 21044128.

46. Lin Y, Gustafson MP, Bulur PA, Gastineau DA, Witzig TE, Dietz AB. Immunosuppressive CD14+HLA-DR(low)/- monocytes in B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Blood. 2011 Jan 20;117(3):872-81. PubMed PMID: 21063024. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3035079.

47. Galon J, Costes A, Sanchez-Cabo F, Kirilovsky A, Mlecnik B, Lagorce-Pages C, et al. Type, density, and location of immune cells within human colorectal tumors predict clinical outcome. Science. 2006 Sep 29;313(5795):1960-4. PubMed PMID: 17008531.

48. Adah D, Hussain M, Qin L, Qin L, Zhang J, Chen X. Implications of MDSCs-targeting in lung cancer chemo-immunotherapeutics. Pharmacol Res. 2016 Aug;110:25-34. PubMed PMID: 27157248.

49. Zhang S, Ma X, Zhu C, Liu L, Wang G, Yuan X. The Role of Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells in Patients with Solid Tumors: A Meta-Analysis. PLoS One. 2016;11(10):e0164514. PubMed PMID: 27780254. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC5079654.

50. Allavena P, Mantovani A. Immunology in the clinic review series; focus on cancer: tumour-associated macrophages: undisputed stars of the inflammatory tumour microenvironment. Clin Exp Immunol. 2012 Feb;167(2):195-205. PubMed PMID: 22235995. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3278685.

51. Condeelis J, Pollard JW. Macrophages: obligate partners for tumor cell migration, invasion, and metastasis. Cell. 2006 Jan 27;124(2):263-6. PubMed PMID: 16439202.

52. Ruffell B, Affara NI, Coussens LM. Differential macrophage programming in the tumor microenvironment. Trends Immunol. 2012 Mar;33(3):119-26. PubMed PMID: 22277903. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3294003.

53. De Palma M, Lewis CE. Macrophage regulation of tumor responses to anticancer therapies. Cancer Cell. 2013 Mar 18;23(3):277-86. PubMed PMID: 23518347.

54. Brown JM, Recht L, Strober S. The Promise of Targeting Macrophages in Cancer Therapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2017 Mar 24. PubMed PMID: 28341752.

55. Sugimura K, Miyata H, Tanaka K, Takahashi T, Kurokawa Y, Yamasaki M, et al. High infiltration of tumor-associated macrophages is associated with a poor response to chemotherapy and poor prognosis of patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy for esophageal cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2015 May;111(6):752-9. PubMed PMID: 25752960.

56. Kioi M, Vogel H, Schultz G, Hoffman RM, Harsh GR, Brown JM. Inhibition of vasculogenesis, but not angiogenesis, prevents the recurrence of glioblastoma after irradiation in mice. J Clin Invest. 2010 Mar;120(3):694-705. PubMed PMID: 20179352. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2827954.

57. Chen FH, Chiang CS, Wang CC, Tsai CS, Jung SM, Lee CC, et al. Radiotherapy decreases vascular density and causes hypoxia with macrophage aggregation in TRAMP-C1 prostate tumors. Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Mar 01;15(5):1721-9. PubMed PMID: 19240176. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC2868361.

58. Russell JS, Brown JM. The irradiated tumor microenvironment: role of tumor-associated macrophages in vascular recovery. Front Physiol. 2013;4:157. PubMed PMID: 23882218. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3713331.

59. Oppermann UC, Knapp S, Bonetto V, Ladenstein R, Jornvall H. Isolation and structure of repressor-like proteins from the archaeon Sulfolobus solfataricus. Co-purification of RNase A with Sso7c. FEBS Lett. 1998 Aug 07;432(3):141-4. PubMed PMID: 9720912.

60. D'Ignazio L, Batie M, Rocha S. Hypoxia and Inflammation in Cancer, Focus on HIF and NF-kappaB. Biomedicines. 2017 May 09;5(2). PubMed PMID: 28536364.

61. Li YL, Zhao H, Ren XB. Relationship of VEGF/VEGFR with immune and cancer cells: staggering or forward? Cancer Biol Med. 2016 Jun;13(2):206-14. PubMed PMID: 27458528. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC4944543.

62. Noman MZ, Desantis G, Janji B, Hasmim M, Karray S, Dessen P, et al. PD-L1 is a novel direct target of HIF-1alpha, and its blockade under hypoxia enhanced MDSC-mediated T cell activation. J Exp Med. 2014 May 05;211(5):781-90. PubMed PMID: 24778419. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC4010891.

63. Leone RD, Horton MR, Powell JD. Something in the air: hyperoxic conditioning of the tumor microenvironment for enhanced immunotherapy. Cancer Cell. 2015 Apr 13;27(4):435-6. PubMed PMID: 25873169. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC4696011.

64. Huang Y, Yuan J, Righi E, Kamoun WS, Ancukiewicz M, Nezivar J, et al. Vascular normalizing doses of antiangiogenic treatment reprogram the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment and enhance immunotherapy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Oct 23;109(43):17561-6. PubMed PMID: 23045683. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3491458.

65. Farsaci B, Higgins JP, Hodge JW. Consequence of dose scheduling of sunitinib on host immune response elements and vaccine combination therapy. Int J Cancer. 2012 Apr 15;130(8):1948-59. PubMed PMID: 21633954. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3232304.

66. Bose A, Taylor JL, Alber S, Watkins SC, Garcia JA, Rini BI, et al. Sunitinib facilitates the activation and recruitment of therapeutic anti-tumor immunity in concert with specific vaccination. Int J Cancer. 2011 Nov 01;129(9):2158-70. PubMed PMID: 21170961. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3110980.

67. Farsaci B, Donahue RN, Coplin MA, Grenga I, Lepone LM, Molinolo AA, et al. Immune consequences of decreasing tumor vasculature with antiangiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors in combination with therapeutic vaccines. Cancer immunology research. 2014 Nov;2(11):1090-102. PubMed PMID: 25092771. Pubmed Central PMCID: 4221465.

68. Guislain A, Gadiot J, Kaiser A, Jordanova ES, Broeks A, Sanders J, et al. Sunitinib pretreatment improves tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte expansion by reduction in intratumoral content of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in human renal cell carcinoma. Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII. 2015 Oct;64(10):1241-50. PubMed PMID: 26105626.

69. Finke JH, Rayman PA, Ko JS, Bradley JM, Gendler SJ, Cohen PA. Modification of the tumor microenvironment as a novel target of renal cell carcinoma therapeutics. Cancer J. 2013 Jul-Aug;19(4):353-64. PubMed PMID: 23867518. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3879112.

70. van Hooren L, Georganaki M, Huang H, Mangsbo SM, Dimberg A. Sunitinib enhances the antitumor responses of agonistic CD40-antibody by reducing MDSCs and synergistically improving endothelial activation and T-cell recruitment. Oncotarget. 2016 Jul 01;7(31):50277-89. PubMed PMID: 27385210. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC5226582.

71. Voron T, Marcheteau E, Pernot S, Colussi O, Tartour E, Taieb J, et al. Control of the immune response by pro-angiogenic factors. Front Oncol. 2014;4:70. PubMed PMID: 24765614. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3980099.

72. Chung AS, Wu X, Zhuang G, Ngu H, Kasman I, Zhang J, et al. An interleukin-17-mediated paracrine network promotes tumor resistance to anti-angiogenic therapy. Nat Med. 2013 Sep;19(9):1114-23. PubMed PMID: 23913124.

73. Santoni M, Berardi R, Amantini C, Burattini L, Santini D, Santoni G, et al. Role of natural and adaptive immunity in renal cell carcinoma response to VEGFR-TKIs and mTOR inhibitor. Int J Cancer. 2014 Jun 15;134(12):2772-7. PubMed PMID: 24114790.

74. Shojaei F, Wu X, Malik AK, Zhong C, Baldwin ME, Schanz S, et al. Tumor refractoriness to anti-VEGF treatment is mediated by CD11b+Gr1+ myeloid cells. Nat Biotechnol. 2007 Aug;25(8):911-20. PubMed PMID: 17664940.

75. Liu XD, Hoang A, Zhou L, Kalra S, Yetil A, Sun M, et al. Resistance to Antiangiogenic Therapy Is Associated with an Immunosuppressive Tumor Microenvironment in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma. Cancer Immunol Res. 2015 Sep;3(9):1017-29. PubMed PMID: 26014097. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC4561186.

76. Huang FP, Chen YX, To CK. Guiding the "misguided" - functional conditioning of dendritic cells for the DC-based immunotherapy against tumours. Eur J Immunol. 2011 Jan;41(1):18-25. PubMed PMID: 21182072.

77. Ozao-Choy J, Ma G, Kao J, Wang GX, Meseck M, Sung M, et al. The novel role of tyrosine kinase inhibitor in the reversal of immune suppression and modulation of tumor microenvironment for immune-based cancer therapies. Cancer research. 2009 Mar 15;69(6):2514-22. PubMed PMID: 19276342. Pubmed Central PMCID: 4370269.

78. Kalathil SG, Lugade AA, Miller A, Iyer R, Thanavala Y. PD-1+ and Foxp3+ T cell reduction correlates with survival of HCC patients after sorafenib therapy. JCI Insight. 2016 Jul 21;1(11). PubMed PMID: 27540594. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC4986927.

79. Padera TP, Stoll BR, Tooredman JB, Capen D, di Tomaso E, Jain RK. Pathology: cancer cells compress intratumour vessels. Nature. 2004 Feb 19;427(6976):695. PubMed PMID: 14973470.

80. Jain RK. Normalizing tumor vasculature with anti-angiogenic therapy: a new paradigm for combination therapy. Nat Med. 2001 Sep;7(9):987-9. PubMed PMID: 11533692.

81. Jain RK. Delivery of novel therapeutic agents in tumors: physiological barriers and strategies. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989 Apr 19;81(8):570-6. PubMed PMID: 2649688.

82. Shi S, Chen L, Huang G. Antiangiogenic therapy improves the antitumor effect of adoptive cell immunotherapy by normalizing tumor vasculature. Med Oncol. 2013 Dec;30(4):698. PubMed PMID: 23982676.

83. Gremonprez F, Descamps B, Izmer A, Vanhove C, Vanhaecke F, De Wever O, et al. Pretreatment with VEGF(R)-inhibitors reduces interstitial fluid pressure, increases intraperitoneal chemotherapy drug penetration, and impedes tumor growth in a mouse colorectal carcinomatosis model. Oncotarget. 2015 Oct 06;6(30):29889-900. PubMed PMID: 26375674. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC4745770.

84. Roland CL, Dineen SP, Lynn KD, Sullivan LA, Dellinger MT, Sadegh L, et al. Inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor reduces angiogenesis and modulates immune cell infiltration of orthotopic breast cancer xenografts. Mol Cancer Ther. 2009 Jul;8(7):1761-71. PubMed PMID: 19567820.

85. Terme M, Pernot S, Marcheteau E, Sandoval F, Benhamouda N, Colussi O, et al. VEGFA-VEGFR pathway blockade inhibits tumor-induced regulatory T-cell proliferation in colorectal cancer. Cancer Res. 2013 Jan 15;73(2):539-49. PubMed PMID: 23108136.

86. Donini M, Buti S, Lazzarelli S, Bozzetti R, Rivoltini L, Camisaschi C, et al. Dose-finding/phase II trial: bevacizumab, immunotherapy, and chemotherapy (BIC) in metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Antitumor effects and variations of circulating T regulatory cells (Treg). Target Oncol. 2015 Jun;10(2):277-86. PubMed PMID: 25230695.

87. Roselli M, Formica V, Cereda V, Jochems C, Richards J, Grenga I, et al. The association of clinical outcome and peripheral T-cell subsets in metastatic colorectal cancer patients receiving first-line FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab therapy. Oncoimmunology. 2016 Jul;5(7):e1188243. PubMed PMID: 27622042. Pubmed Central PMCID: 5006891.

88. Koinis F, Vetsika EK, Aggouraki D, Skalidaki E, Koutoulaki A, Gkioulmpasani M, et al. Effect of First-Line Treatment on Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells' Subpopulations in the Peripheral Blood of Patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer. J Thorac Oncol. 2016 Aug;11(8):1263-72. PubMed PMID: 27178984.

89. Limagne E, Euvrard R, Thibaudin M, Rebe C, Derangere V, Chevriaux A, et al. Accumulation of MDSC and Th17 Cells in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Predicts the Efficacy of a FOLFOX-Bevacizumab Drug Treatment Regimen. Cancer Res. 2016 Sep 15;76(18):5241-52. PubMed PMID: 27496709.

90. Bandara NA, Bates CD, Lu Y, Hoylman EK, Low PS. Folate-Hapten-Mediated Immunotherapy Synergizes with Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors in Treating Murine Models of Cancer. Mol Cancer Ther. 2017 Mar;16(3):461-8. PubMed PMID: 27980109. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC5375111.

91. Yu N, Fu S, Xu Z, Liu Y, Hao J, Zhang A, et al. Synergistic antitumor responses by combined GITR activation and sunitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Int J Cancer. 2016 Jan 15;138(2):451-62. PubMed PMID: 26239999.

92. Finke JH, Rini B, Ireland J, Rayman P, Richmond A, Golshayan A, et al. Sunitinib reverses type-1 immune suppression and decreases T-regulatory cells in renal cell carcinoma patients. Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. 2008 Oct 15;14(20):6674-82. PubMed PMID: 18927310.

93. Ko JS, Zea AH, Rini BI, Ireland JL, Elson P, Cohen P, et al. Sunitinib mediates reversal of myeloid-derived suppressor cell accumulation in renal cell carcinoma patients. Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. 2009 Mar 15;15(6):2148-57. PubMed PMID: 19276286.

94. Raychaudhuri B, Rayman P, Huang P, Grabowski M, Hambardzumyan D, Finke JH, et al. Myeloid derived suppressor cell infiltration of murine and human gliomas is associated with reduction of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes. Journal of neuro-oncology. 2015 Apr;122(2):293-301. PubMed PMID: 25579983.

95. Draghiciu O, Boerma A, Hoogeboom BN, Nijman HW, Daemen T. A rationally designed combined treatment with an alphavirus-based cancer vaccine, sunitinib and low-dose tumor irradiation completely blocks tumor development. Oncoimmunology. 2015 Oct;4(10):e1029699. PubMed PMID: 26451295. Pubmed Central PMCID: 4589062.

96. Adotevi O, Pere H, Ravel P, Haicheur N, Badoual C, Merillon N, et al. A decrease of regulatory T cells correlates with overall survival after sunitinib-based antiangiogenic therapy in metastatic renal cancer patients. J Immunother. 2010 Nov-Dec;33(9):991-8. PubMed PMID: 20948437.

97. Choueiri TK, Figueroa DJ, Fay AP, Signoretti S, Liu Y, Gagnon R, et al. Correlation of PD-L1 tumor expression and treatment outcomes in patients with renal cell carcinoma receiving sunitinib or pazopanib: results from COMPARZ, a randomized controlled trial. Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Mar 01;21(5):1071-7. PubMed PMID: 25538263.

98. Rini BI, Stein M, Shannon P, Eddy S, Tyler A, Stephenson JJ, Jr., et al. Phase 1 dose-escalation trial of tremelimumab plus sunitinib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Cancer. 2011 Feb 15;117(4):758-67. PubMed PMID: 20922784.

99. Rini BI, Stenzl A, Zdrojowy R, Kogan M, Shkolnik M, Oudard S, et al. IMA901, a multipeptide cancer vaccine, plus sunitinib versus sunitinib alone, as first-line therapy for advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (IMPRINT): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial. The Lancet Oncology. 2016 Nov;17(11):1599-611. PubMed PMID: 27720136.

100.  Patterson SJ, Pesenacker AM, Wang AY, Gillies J, Mojibian M, Morishita K, et al. T regulatory cell chemokine production mediates pathogenic T cell attraction and suppression. The Journal of clinical investigation. 2016 Mar 01;126(3):1039-51. PubMed PMID: 26854929. Pubmed Central PMCID: 4767359.

101.  Cao M, Xu Y, Youn JI, Cabrera R, Zhang X, Gabrilovich D, et al. Kinase inhibitor Sorafenib modulates immunosuppressive cell populations in a murine liver cancer model. Lab Invest. 2011 Apr;91(4):598-608. PubMed PMID: 21321535. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3711234.

102.  Cabrera R, Ararat M, Xu Y, Brusko T, Wasserfall C, Atkinson MA, et al. Immune modulation of effector CD4+ and regulatory T cell function by sorafenib in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2013 Apr;62(4):737-46. PubMed PMID: 23223899. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3863727.

103.  Nagai H, Mukozu T, Matsui D, Kanekawa T, Kanayama M, Wakui N, et al. Sorafenib prevents escape from host immunity in liver cirrhosis patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Clin Dev Immunol. 2012;2012:607851. PubMed PMID: 22666283. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC3359796.

104.  Motoshima T, Komohara Y, Horlad H, Takeuchi A, Maeda Y, Tanoue K, et al. Sorafenib enhances the antitumor effects of anti-CTLA-4 antibody in a murine cancer model by inhibiting myeloid-derived suppressor cells. Oncol Rep. 2015 Jun;33(6):2947-53. PubMed PMID: 25845968.

105.  Piscazzi A, Costantino E, Maddalena F, Natalicchio MI, Gerardi AM, Antonetti R, et al. Activation of the RAS/RAF/ERK signaling pathway contributes to resistance to sunitinib in thyroid carcinoma cell lines. The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism. 2012 Jun;97(6):E898-906. PubMed PMID: 22442268.

106.  Du Four S, Maenhout SK, Benteyn D, De Keersmaecker B, Duerinck J, Thielemans K, et al. Disease progression in recurrent glioblastoma patients treated with the VEGFR inhibitor axitinib is associated with increased regulatory T cell numbers and T cell exhaustion. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2016 Jun;65(6):727-40. PubMed PMID: 27098427.

107.  Zhang X, Fang X, Gao Z, Chen W, Tao F, Cai P, et al. Axitinib, a selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, exerts an anticancer effect in melanoma through promoting antitumor immunity. Anticancer Drugs. 2014 Feb;25(2):204-11. PubMed PMID: 24135499.

108.  Du Four S, Maenhout SK, De Pierre K, Renmans D, Niclou SP, Thielemans K, et al. Axitinib increases the infiltration of immune cells and reduces the suppressive capacity of monocytic MDSCs in an intracranial mouse melanoma model. Oncoimmunology. 2015 Apr;4(4):e998107. PubMed PMID: 26137411. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC4485747.

109.  Schweizer MT, Carducci MA. From bevacizumab to tasquinimod: angiogenesis as a therapeutic target in prostate cancer. Cancer J. 2013 Jan-Feb;19(1):99-106. PubMed PMID: 23337763.

110.  Lu X, Horner JW, Paul E, Shang X, Troncoso P, Deng P, et al. Effective combinatorial immunotherapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer. Nature. 2017 Mar 30;543(7647):728-32. PubMed PMID: 28321130. Pubmed Central PMCID: PMC537402

 


 


Conflict of Interest: No conflicts declared.

* Corresponding Author. Email: zhao@augusta.edu

© 2017 by the Journal of Nature and Science (JNSCI).