Tumor-induced MDSC act via remote control to inhibit L-selectin-dependent adaptive immunity in lymph nodes

  1. Amy W Ku
  2. Jason B Muhitch
  3. Colin A Powers
  4. Michael G Diehl
  5. Minhyung Kim
  6. Daniel T Fisher
  7. Anand P Sharda
  8. Virginia K Clements
  9. Kieran O'Loughlin
  10. Hans Minderman
  11. Michelle N Messmer
  12. Jing Ma
  13. Joseph J Skitzki
  14. Douglas A Steeber
  15. Bruce Walcheck
  16. Suzanne Ostrand-Rosenberg
  17. Scott I Abrams
  18. Sharon S Evans  Is a corresponding author
  1. Roswell Park Cancer Institute, United States
  2. University of Maryland, Baltimore County, United States
  3. University of Minnesota, United States
  4. University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, United States

Abstract

Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC) contribute to an immunosuppressive network that drives cancer escape by disabling T cell adaptive immunity. The prevailing view is that MDSC-mediated immunosuppression is restricted to tissues where MDSC co-mingle with T cells. Here we show that splenic or, unexpectedly, blood-borne MDSC execute far-reaching immune suppression by reducing expression of the L-selectin lymph node (LN) homing receptor on naïve T and B cells. MDSC-induced L-selectin loss occurs through a contact-dependent, post-transcriptional mechanism that is independent of the major L-selectin sheddase, ADAM17, but results in significant elevation of circulating L-selectin in tumor-bearing mice. Even moderate deficits in L-selectin expression disrupt T cell trafficking to distant LN. Furthermore, T cells preconditioned by MDSC have diminished responses to subsequent antigen exposure, which in conjunction with reduced trafficking, severely diminishes antigen-driven expansion in widely-dispersed LN. These results establish novel mechanisms for MDSC-mediated immunosuppression that have unanticipated implications for systemic cancer immunity.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Amy W Ku

    Department of Immunology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jason B Muhitch

    Department of Immunology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Colin A Powers

    Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Michael G Diehl

    Department of Immunology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Minhyung Kim

    Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Daniel T Fisher

    Department of Immunology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Anand P Sharda

    Department of Urology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Virginia K Clements

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Kieran O'Loughlin

    Department of Flow and Image Cytometry, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Hans Minderman

    Department of Flow and Image Cytometry, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Michelle N Messmer

    Department of Immunology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Jing Ma

    Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Joseph J Skitzki

    Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Douglas A Steeber

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Bruce Walcheck

    Department of Veterinary and Biomedical Sciences, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Suzanne Ostrand-Rosenberg

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Maryland, Baltimore County, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Scott I Abrams

    Department of Immunology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Sharon S Evans

    Department of Immunology, Roswell Park Cancer Institute, Buffalo, United States
    For correspondence
    sharon.evans@roswellpark.org
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2958-6642

Funding

National Institutes of Health (CA79765)

  • Sharon S Evans

UB Mark Diamond Research Fund

  • Amy W Ku

Jennifer Linscott Tietgen Family Foundation

  • Joseph J Skitzki
  • Sharon S Evans

Breast Cancer Coalition of Rochester

  • Scott I Abrams
  • Sharon S Evans

NCI Cancer Center Support Grant (5P30 CA016056)

  • Kieran O'Loughlin
  • Hans Minderman

National Institutes of Health (1R50CA211108)

  • Hans Minderman

National Institutes of Health (AI082039)

  • Sharon S Evans

National Institutes of Health (T32 CA085183)

  • Amy W Ku

National Institutes of Health (5T32 CA108456)

  • Colin A Powers

National Institutes of Health (CA203348)

  • Bruce Walcheck

National Institutes of Health (GM021248)

  • Suzanne Ostrand-Rosenberg

National Institutes of Health (CA115880)

  • Suzanne Ostrand-Rosenberg

National Institutes of Health (CA140622)

  • Scott I Abrams

National Institutes of Health (CA172105)

  • Scott I Abrams

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Ronald N Germain, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in accordance with the recommendations in the NIH Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. All of the animals were handled according to approved IACUC protocols at participating institutions (i.e., 859M and 1117M at Roswell Park Cancer Institute; SO01691417 at University of Maryland, Baltimore County; 15-16 #11 at University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee; and 1401-31272A at University of Minnesota). All surgery was performed under appropriate anesthesia and analgesia to minimize suffering and pain. The use of human PBMCs from anonymous, de-identified donors was classified as non-human subject research in accordance with federal regulations and thus not subjected to formal IRB review, but can be accessed through Roswell Park Clinical Research Services under the reference number BDR 069116.

Version history

  1. Received: April 29, 2016
  2. Accepted: December 7, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: December 8, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: December 29, 2016 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2016, Ku et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 3,198
    views
  • 847
    downloads
  • 76
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Amy W Ku
  2. Jason B Muhitch
  3. Colin A Powers
  4. Michael G Diehl
  5. Minhyung Kim
  6. Daniel T Fisher
  7. Anand P Sharda
  8. Virginia K Clements
  9. Kieran O'Loughlin
  10. Hans Minderman
  11. Michelle N Messmer
  12. Jing Ma
  13. Joseph J Skitzki
  14. Douglas A Steeber
  15. Bruce Walcheck
  16. Suzanne Ostrand-Rosenberg
  17. Scott I Abrams
  18. Sharon S Evans
(2016)
Tumor-induced MDSC act via remote control to inhibit L-selectin-dependent adaptive immunity in lymph nodes
eLife 5:e17375.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.17375

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.17375

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    Fang Huang, Zhenwei Dai ... Yang Wang
    Research Article

    Aberrant alternative splicing is well-known to be closely associated with tumorigenesis of various cancers. However, the intricate mechanisms underlying breast cancer metastasis driven by deregulated splicing events remain largely unexplored. Here, we unveiled that RBM7 is decreased in lymph node and distant organ metastases of breast cancer as compared to primary lesions and low expression of RBM7 is correlated with the reduced disease-free survival of breast cancer patients. Breast cancer cells with RBM7 depletion exhibited an increased potential for lung metastasis compared to scramble control cells. The absence of RBM7 stimulated breast cancer cell migration, invasion, and angiogenesis. Mechanistically, RBM7 controlled the splicing switch of MFGE8, favoring the production of the predominant isoform of MFGE8, MFGE8-L. This resulted in the attenuation of STAT1 phosphorylation and alterations in cell adhesion molecules. MFGE8-L exerted an inhibitory effect on the migratory and invasive capability of breast cancer cells, while the truncated isoform MFGE8-S, which lack the second F5/8 type C domain had the opposite effect. In addition, RBM7 negatively regulates the NF-κB cascade and an NF-κB inhibitor could obstruct the increase in HUVEC tube formation caused by RBM7 silencing. Clinically, we noticed a positive correlation between RBM7 expression and MFGE8 exon7 inclusion in breast cancer tissues, providing new mechanistic insights for molecular-targeted therapy in combating breast cancer.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Immunology and Inflammation
    Nicholas J Mullen, Surendra K Shukla ... Pankaj K Singh
    Research Article

    Pyrimidine nucleotide biosynthesis is a druggable metabolic dependency of cancer cells, and chemotherapy agents targeting pyrimidine metabolism are the backbone of treatment for many cancers. Dihydroorotate dehydrogenase (DHODH) is an essential enzyme in the de novo pyrimidine biosynthesis pathway that can be targeted by clinically approved inhibitors. However, despite robust preclinical anticancer efficacy, DHODH inhibitors have shown limited single-agent activity in phase 1 and 2 clinical trials. Therefore, novel combination therapy strategies are necessary to realize the potential of these drugs. To search for therapeutic vulnerabilities induced by DHODH inhibition, we examined gene expression changes in cancer cells treated with the potent and selective DHODH inhibitor brequinar (BQ). This revealed that BQ treatment causes upregulation of antigen presentation pathway genes and cell surface MHC class I expression. Mechanistic studies showed that this effect is (1) strictly dependent on pyrimidine nucleotide depletion, (2) independent of canonical antigen presentation pathway transcriptional regulators, and (3) mediated by RNA polymerase II elongation control by positive transcription elongation factor B (P-TEFb). Furthermore, BQ showed impressive single-agent efficacy in the immunocompetent B16F10 melanoma model, and combination treatment with BQ and dual immune checkpoint blockade (anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1) significantly prolonged mouse survival compared to either therapy alone. Our results have important implications for the clinical development of DHODH inhibitors and provide a rationale for combination therapy with BQ and immune checkpoint blockade.