Cited by 1,429Cancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersT-cell and B-cell ImmunologyImmunotherapy and Immune Responses

A Cancer Cell Program Promotes T Cell Exclusion and Resistance to Checkpoint Blockade

Open access
Jerby-Arnon, Livnat, Shah, Parin, Cuoco, Michael S., Rodman, Christopher, Su, Mei-Ju, Melms, Johannes C., Leeson, Rachel, Kanodia, Abhay +44 more·2018·Cell

Abstract

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) produce durable responses in some melanoma patients, but many patients derive no clinical benefit, and the molecular underpinnings of such resistance remain elusive. Here, we leveraged single-cell RNA sequencing (scRNA-seq) from 33 melanoma tumors and computational analyses to interrogate malignant cell states that promote immune evasion. We identified a resistance program expressed by malignant cells that is associated with T cell exclusion and immune evasion. The program is expressed prior to immunotherapy, characterizes cold niches in situ, and predicts clinical responses to anti-PD-1 therapy in an independent cohort of 112 melanoma patients. CDK4/6-inhibition represses this program in individual malignant cells, induces senescence, and reduces melanoma tumor outgrowth in mouse models in vivo when given in combination with immunotherapy. Our study provides a high-resolution landscape of ICI-resistant cell states, identifies clinically predictive signatures, and suggests new therapeutic strategies to overcome immunotherapy resistance.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cell.2018.09.006

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Clinically relevant ICR mechanisms include B2M mutations causing MHC Class I loss, antigen presentation downregulation, and IFNγ-JAK/STAT mutations that impair response to T cell anti-tumor activity.

    “Clinically relevant mechanisms of include mutations in beta-2-microglobulin (B2M) resulting in loss of MHC Class I presentation, downregulation of the antigen presentation machinery, and mutations in the IFNγ-JAK/STAT pathway that impair response to T cell mediated anti-tumor activity7–9.”
  • Perturbations of B2M, HLA-A, JAK1, JAK2, STAT1, IFNGR1, and IFNGR2 conferred immune evasion, consistent with clinical resistance mechanisms.

    “perturbations of B2M, HLA-A, JAK1, JAK2, STAT1, IFNGR1 and IFNGR2 (Fig. 2d,e, Extended Data Fig. 3e,f, Supplementary Table 2) conferred immune evasion, consistent with clinical mechanisms of resistance to immunotherapy7–9.”
  • An ICR signature predictive of intrinsic ICI resistance was previously identified in a subset of malignant cells from metastatic melanoma patients using scRNA-seq.

    “We previously identified an ICR signature, which is predictive of intrinsic resistance to ICI, in a subset of malignant cells in patients with metastatic melanoma using scRNA-seq9.”
  • Upregulation of MYC and CDK4/6 and their transcriptional targets was associated with increased resistance to immunotherapy, and CDK4/6 inhibitors reduced resistance in human and pre-clinical melanoma models.

    “consistent with our previously reported patient and pre-clinical data, where we demonstrate that upregulation of MYC and CDK4/6 (and their transcriptional targets) was associated with increased resistance to immunotherapy, and CDK4/6 inhibitors reduced resistance in human and pre-clinical melanoma models9.”
  • This cytokine secretion occurs either after endogenous retrovirus derepression and nucleic acid sensing or after permanent cell cycle blockage with a senescence-associated secretory phenotype.

    “This occurs either upon the derepression of endogenous retroviruses and consequent nucleic acid sensing (Goel et al., 2017; Vanpouille-Box et al., 2019) or following the establishment of a permanent cell cycle blockage (i.e., cellular senescence) characterized by an abundant secretory component, the so-called senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP) (Jerby-Arnon et al., 2018).”

    From Immunomodulation by targeted anticancer agents (2021) · cites this paper as Jerby-Arnon et al., 2018

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jerby-Arnon, L., Shah, P., Cuoco, M. S., Rodman, C., Su, M.-J., Melms, J. C., Leeson, R., Kanodia, A., Mei, S., Lin, J.-R., Wang, S., Rabasha, B., Liu, D., Zhang, G., Margolais, C., Ashenberg, O., Ott, P. A., Buchbinder, E. I., Haq, R., Hodi, F. S., Boland, G. M., Sullivan, R. J., Frederick, D. T., Miao, B., Moll, T., Flaherty, K. T., Herlyn, M., Jenkins, R. W., Thummalapalli, R., Kowalczyk, M. S., Cañadas, I., Schilling, B., Cartwright, A. N. R., Luoma, A. M., Malu, S., Hwu, P., Bernatchez, C., Forget, M.-A., Barbie, D. A., Shalek, A. K., Tirosh, I., Sorger, P. K., Wucherpfennig, K., Van Allen, E. M., Schadendorf, D., Johnson, B. E., Rotem, A., Rozenblatt-Rosen, O., Garraway, L. A., Yoon, C. H., Izar, B., & Regev, A.
Affiliations
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US)
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • The Wistar Institute (US)
  • Massachusetts General Hospital (US)
  • Essen University Hospital (DE)
  • The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
  • Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Izar, Benjamin
Venue
Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-11
Volume
175
Issue
4
Pages
984-997.e24
ISSN
0092-8674 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2898830231
Cited by
1,429
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 166 · 2025: 187 · 2024: 195 · 2023: 207 · 2022: 203 · 2021: 202 · 2020: 161 · 2019: 102 · 2018: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
44.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • DSpace@MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • CRI
  • NCI (K08-CA222663, 1U24CA180922, R33-CA202820)
  • DFCI
  • SITC
  • Klarman Cell Observatory
  • STARR Cancer Consortium
  • Koch Institute (P30-CA14051)
  • Harvard
  • MIT
  • AMRF
  • Broad Institute
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › T-cell and B-cell Immunology
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immunotherapy and Immune Responses
Keywords
melanoma, immune checkpoint inhibitors, immunotherapy resistance, T-cell exclusion, immune evasion, cold tumors, anti-PD-1 therapy, CDK4/6 inhibition, cellular senescence, cancer cell states, predictive biomarkers, combination therapy
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Animals, Antineoplastic Agents, Female, Humans, Immunotherapy, Male, Melanoma, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Middle Aged, T-Lymphocytes, Tumor Escape, Cell Line, Tumor, Protein Kinase Inhibitors, Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4, Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 6, Mice, Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review