Explore the vast range of titles available.

Lymphocyte activation gene 3 (LAG-3) is a cell surface inhibitory receptor with multiple biological activities over T cell activation and effector functions. LAG-3 plays a regulatory role in immunity and emerged some time ago as an inhibitory immune checkpoint molecule comparable to PD-1 and CTLA-4 and a potential target for enhancing anti-cancer immune responses. LAG-3 is the third inhibitory receptor to be exploited in human anti-cancer immunotherapies, and it is considered a potential next-generation cancer immunotherapy target in human therapy, right next to PD-1 and CTLA-4. Unlike PD-1 and CTLA-4, the exact mechanisms of action of LAG-3 and its relationship with other immune checkpoint molecules remain poorly understood. This is partly caused by the presence of non-conventional signaling motifs in its intracellular domain that are different from other conventional immunoregulatory signaling motifs but with similar inhibitory activities. Here we summarize the current understanding of LAG-3 signaling and its role in LAG-3 functions, from its mechanisms of action to clinical applications.

The majority of lung cancer patients progressing from conventional therapies are refractory to PD‐L1/PD‐1 blockade monotherapy. Here, we show that baseline systemic CD4 immunity is a differential factor for clinical responses. Patients with functional systemic CD4 T cells included all objective responders and could be identified before the start of therapy by having a high proportion of memory CD4 T cells. In these patients, CD4 T cells possessed significant proliferative capacities, low co‐expression of PD‐1/LAG‐3 and were responsive to PD‐1 blockade ex vivo and in vivo . In contrast, patients with dysfunctional systemic CD4 immunity did not respond even though they had lung cancer‐specific T cells. Although proficient in cytokine production, CD4 T cells in these patients proliferated very poorly, strongly co‐upregulated PD‐1/LAG‐3, and were largely refractory to PD‐1 monoblockade. CD8 immunity only recovered in patients with functional CD4 immunity. T‐cell proliferative dysfunctionality could be reverted by PD‐1/LAG‐3 co‐blockade. Patients with functional CD4 immunity and PD‐L1 tumor positivity exhibited response rates of 70%, highlighting the contribution of CD4 immunity for efficacious PD‐L1/PD‐1 blockade therapy. Synopsis Lung cancer patients are often refractory to PD‐L1/PD‐1 blockade therapy. This study shows that patients progressing from conventional therapies that have functional CD4 T cells respond to PD‐L1/PD‐1 blockade immunotherapy, while patients with proliferative dysfunctional CD4 T cells do not respond. Functional systemic CD4 immunity is required for objective clinical responses to PD‐L1/PD‐1 blockade therapy in human lung cancer patients. Systemic memory CD4 T cells identify intrinsic non‐responder from potentially responder patients. 70% of patients with high baseline percentages of memory CD4 T cells and PD‐L1‐positive tumors respond to therapy. Proliferative CD4 dysfunctionality in non‐responder patients can be overcome by PD‐1/LAG‐3 co‐blockade. Graphical Abstract Lung cancer patients are often refractory to PD‐L1/PD‐1 blockade therapy. This study shows that patients progressing from conventional therapies that have functional CD4 T cells respond to PD‐L1/PD‐1 blockade immunotherapy, while patients with proliferative dysfunctional CD4 T cells do not respond.

PD-L1/PD-1 blockade immunotherapy has significantly improved treatment outcome for several cancer types compared to conventional cytotoxic therapies. However, the specific molecular and cellular mechanisms behind its efficacy are currently unclear. There is increasing evidence in murine models and in patients that unveil the key importance of systemic immunity to achieve clinical responses under several types of immunotherapy. Indeed, PD-L1/PD-1 blockade induces the expansion of systemic CD8+ PD-1+ T cell subpopulations which might be responsible for direct anti-tumor responses. However, the role of CD4+ T cells in PD-L1/PD-1 blockade-induced anti-tumor responses has been less documented. In this review we focus on the experimental data supporting the “often suspected” indispensable helper function of CD4 T cells towards CD8 effector anti-tumor responses in cancer; and particularly, we highlight the recently published studies uncovering the key contribution of systemic CD4 T cells to clinical efficacy in PD-L1/PD-1 blockade therapies. We conclude and propose that the presence of specific CD4 T cell memory subsets in peripheral blood before the initiation of treatments is a strong predictor of responses in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Therefore, development of new approaches to improve CD4 responses before PD-L1/PD-1 blockade therapy could be the solution to increase response rates and survival of patients.

Cancer immunotherapies targeting immune checkpoints such as programmed cell-death protein 1 (PD-1) and its ligand programmed cell-death 1 ligand 1 (PD-L1), are revolutionizing cancer treatment and transforming the practice of medical oncology. However, despite all the recent successes of this type of immunotherapies, most patients are still refractory and present either intrinsic resistance or acquired resistance. Either way, this is a major clinical problem and one of the most significant challenges in oncology. Therefore, the identification of biomarkers to predict clinical responses or for patient stratification by probability of response has become a clinical necessity. However, the mechanisms leading to PD-L1/PD-1 blockade resistance are still poorly understood. A deeper understanding of the basic mechanisms underlying resistance to cancer immunotherapies will provide insight for further development of novel strategies designed to overcome resistance and treatment failure. Here we discuss some of the major molecular mechanisms of resistance to PD-L1/PD-1 immune checkpoint blockade and argue whether tumor intrinsic or extrinsic factors constitute main determinants of response and resistance.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized medical practice in oncology since the FDA approval of the first ICI 11 years ago. In light of this, Lymphocyte-Activation Gene 3 (LAG-3) is one of the most important next-generation immune checkpoint molecules, playing a similar role as Programmed cell Death protein 1 (PD-1) and Cytotoxic T-Lymphocyte Antigen 4 (CTLA-4). 19 LAG-3 targeting molecules are being evaluated at 108 clinical trials which are demonstrating positive results, including promising bispecific molecules targeting LAG-3 simultaneously with other ICIs. Recently, a new dual anti-PD-1 (Nivolumab) and anti-LAG-3 (Relatimab) treatment developed by Bristol Myers Squibb (Opdualag), was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as the first LAG-3 blocking antibody combination for unresectable or metastatic melanoma. This novel immunotherapy combination more than doubled median progression-free survival (PFS) when compared to nivolumab monotherapy (10.1 months versus 4.6 months). Here, we analyze the large clinical trial responsible for this historical approval (RELATIVITY-047), and discuss the preclinical and clinical developments that led to its jump into clinical practice. We will also summarize results achieved by other LAG-3 targeting molecules with promising anti-tumor activities currently under clinical development in phases I, I/II, II, and III. Opdualag will boost the entry of more LAG-3 targeting molecules into clinical practice, supporting the accumulating evidence highlighting the pivotal role of LAG-3 in cancer.

PD-L1 tumor expression is a widely used biomarker for patient stratification in PD-L1/PD-1 blockade anticancer therapies, particularly for lung cancer. However, the reliability of this marker is still under debate. Moreover, PD-L1 is widely expressed by many immune cell types, and little is known on the relevance of systemic PD-L1+ cells for responses to immune checkpoint blockade. We present two clinical cases of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and PD-L1-negative tumors treated with atezolizumab that showed either objective responses or progression. These patients showed major differences in the distribution of PD-L1 expression within systemic immune cells. Based on these results, an exploratory study was carried out with 32 cases of NSCLC patients undergoing PD-L1/PD-1 blockade therapies, to compare PD-L1 expression profiles and their relationships with clinical outcomes. Significant differences in the percentage of PD-L1+ CD11b+ myeloid cell populations were found between objective responders and non-responders. Patients with percentages of PD-L1+ CD11b+ cells above 30% before the start of immunotherapy showed response rates of 50%, and 70% when combined with memory CD4 T cell profiling. These findings indicate that quantification of systemic PD-L1+ myeloid cell subsets could provide a simple biomarker for patient stratification, even if biopsies are scored as PD-L1 null.

PD-L1/PD-1 blockade immunotherapy has changed the therapeutic approaches for the treatment of many cancers. Nevertheless, the mechanisms underlying its efficacy or treatment failure are still unclear. Proficient systemic immunity seems to be a prerequisite for efficacy, as recently shown in patients and in mouse models. It is widely accepted that expansion of anti-tumor CD8 T cell populations is principally responsible for anti-tumor responses. In contrast, the role of CD4 T cells has been less studied. Here we review and discuss the evidence supporting the contribution of CD4 T cells to anti-tumor immunity, especially recent advances linking CD4 T cell subsets to efficacious PD-L1/PD-1 blockade immunotherapy. We also discuss the role of CD4 T cell memory subsets present in peripheral blood before the start of immunotherapies, and their utility as predictors of response.

A number of studies have explored the main features of predatory practices that prevail in predatory academic journals and conferences. However, not much has been investigated regarding the ways predatory journal editors convey credibility and trustworthiness when addressing scholars looking for publication outlets and, more specifically, what interpersonal resources (like proximity or engagement markers) are used to persuade them. This study draws on a dataset of fifty email messages from predatory publishers collected during the past two years. It seeks to delve into the ways predatory journal editors address “scholar customers” with the aim of persuading them to submit their work. This dataset was first coded following Hyland’s models of proximity and interaction in academic texts, and then qualitatively analysed using NVivo 11 Pro. The analysis shows that (i) textual data provide direct evidence of the texts that predatory publishers send to scholars and the interpersonal dialogue they intend to build with authors in haste for publication; (ii) interactional resources abound, particularly engagement markers, which explicitly aim at building a rapport with the prospective author, and (iii) these predatory texts also contain other engagement-related elements directed to have an effect on the reader’s decision for eventual submission.

Single-agent immunotherapy has been widely accepted as frontline treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with high tumor PD-L1 expression, but most patients do not respond and the mechanisms of resistance are not well known. Several works have highlighted the immunosuppressive activities of myeloid subpopulations, including low-density neutrophils (LDNs), although the context in which these cells play their role is not well defined. We prospectively monitored LDNs in peripheral blood from patients with NSCLC treated with anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as frontline therapy, in a cohort of patients treated with anti-PD1 immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy (CT+IT), and correlated values with outcomes. We explored the underlying mechanisms through ex vivo experiments. Elevated baseline LDNs predict primary resistance to ICI monotherapy in patients with NSCLC, and are not associated with response to CT+IT. Circulating LDNs mediate resistance in NSCLC receiving ICI as frontline therapy through humoral immunosuppression. A depletion of this population with CT+IT might overcome resistance, suggesting that patients with high PD-L1 tumor expression and high baseline LDNs might benefit from this combination. The activation of the HGF/c-MET pathway in patients with elevated LDNs revealed by quantitative proteomics supports potential drug combinations targeting this pathway.

The search for non‐invasive systemic biomarkers of response to PD‐L1/PD‐1 blockade immunotherapy is currently a priority in oncoimmunology. In contrast to classical tumor biomarkers, the identification of clinically useful immunological biomarkers is certainly a challenge, as anti‐cancer immune responses depend on the coordinated action of many cell types. Studies on the dynamics of systemic CD8 T‐cell populations have provided indications that such biomarkers may have a place in clinical practice. However, the power of CD8 T‐cell subsets to discriminate clinical responses in immunotherapy has so far proven to be limited. The systemic evaluation of CD8 T‐cell regulators such as myeloid cells and CD4 T cells may provide the solution. Here we discuss the value of systemic quantification of CD4 T‐cell subsets for patient selection in light of the results obtained by Prof. Kagamu′s and our team. Our studies have independently demonstrated that the evaluation of the pre‐treatment status of systemic CD4 immunity is a critical factor for the clinical outcome of PD‐L1/PD‐1 blockade therapy with robust predictive capacities. Graphical Abstract In this Commentary, D. Escors et al discuss the exciting possibility of using systemic CD4 immunity pre‐treatment status as a predictive tool of clinical outcome following PD‐L1/PD‐1 blockade cancer immunotherapy.