Cited by 697Cancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersRNA regulation and diseaseImmunotherapy and Immune Responses

Loss of ADAR1 in tumours overcomes resistance to immune checkpoint blockade

Open access
Ishizuka, Jeffrey J., Manguso, Robert T., Cheruiyot, Collins K., Bi, Kevin, Panda, Arpit, Iracheta-Vellve, Arvin, Miller, Brian C., Du, Peter P. +19 more·2019·Nature

Abstract

Most patients with cancer either do not respond to immune checkpoint blockade or develop resistance to it, often because of acquired mutations that impair antigen presentation. Here we show that loss of function of the RNA-editing enzyme ADAR1 in tumour cells profoundly sensitizes tumours to immunotherapy and overcomes resistance to checkpoint blockade. In the absence of ADAR1, A-to-I editing of interferon-inducible RNA species is reduced, leading to double-stranded RNA ligand sensing by PKR and MDA5; this results in growth inhibition and tumour inflammation, respectively. Loss of ADAR1 overcomes resistance to PD-1 checkpoint blockade caused by inactivation of antigen presentation by tumour cells. Thus, effective anti-tumour immunity is constrained by inhibitory checkpoints such as ADAR1 that limit the sensing of innate ligands. The induction of sufficient inflammation in tumours that are sensitized to interferon can bypass the therapeutic requirement for CD8+ T cell recognition of cancer cells and may provide a general strategy 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 · 10.1038/s41586-018-0768-9

Cites

39 of 39 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?

  • Pooled in vivo and in vitro CRISPR-Cas9 based screening have nominated several tumour intrinsic drivers of resistance to immunotherapy, but therapeutic applications of these findings remain limited.

    “Pooled in vivo and in vitro CRISPR-Cas9 based screening have nominated several tumour intrinsic drivers of resistance to immunotherapy 4,8-11 , but therapeutic applications of these findings remain limited.”

    From Targeting TBK1 to overcome resistance to cancer immunotherapy (2023) · cites this paper as [8]

    The Abstract (page unavailable) says a pooled in vivo CRISPR screen identified several tumour-cell genes that could affect immunotherapy response, including Adar1. Our copy does not describe a pooled in vitro screen that nominated resistance drivers; the in vitro work described in Methods consists of validation experiments. The statement about limited therapeutic applications follows the citation and is not assessed as attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Tumour-specific loss of TBK1 did not result in dramatic remodeling of the immune compartment, in contrast to other recently characterized immune evasion genes.

    “In contrast to other recently characterized immune evasion genes 4,8,45 , tumour-specific loss of TBK1 did not result in dramatic remodeling of the immune compartment.”

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
Ishizuka, J. J., Manguso, R. T., Cheruiyot, C. K., Bi, K., Panda, A., Iracheta-Vellve, A., Miller, B. C., Du, P. P., Yates, K. B., Dubrot, J., Buchumenski, I., Comstock, D. E., Brown, F. D., Ayer, A., Kohnle, I. C., Pope, H. W., Zimmer, M. D., Sen, D. R., Lane-Reticker, S. K., Robitschek, E. J., Griffin, G. K., Collins, N. B., Long, A. H., Doench, J. G., Kozono, D., Levanon, E. Y., & Haining, W. N.
Affiliations
  • Broad Institute (US)
  • Bar-Ilan University (IL)
  • Dana-Farber Cancer Institute (US)
Corresponding author
Haining, W. Nicholas
Venue
Nature
Published
2018-12-17
Volume
565
Issue
7737
Pages
43-48
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W2904139947
Cited by
697
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 78 · 2025: 97 · 2024: 76 · 2023: 118 · 2022: 85 · 2021: 105 · 2020: 84 · 2019: 51 · 2013: 1
FWCI
23.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Human Genome Research Institute (T32HG002295)
  • National Cancer Institute (T32CA009172)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › RNA regulation and disease
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immunotherapy and Immune Responses
Keywords
ADAR1, A-to-I RNA editing, immune checkpoint inhibitor resistance, anti-PD-1 therapy, PKR, MDA5, double-stranded RNA sensing, tumor inflammation, antigen presentation, tumor immunosuppression, cancer immunotherapy
MeSH terms
Interferon-Induced Helicase, IFIH1, Adenosine Deaminase, Animals, Female, Immunotherapy, Inflammation, Interferons, Melanoma, Experimental, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Phenotype, RNA, Double-Stranded, Histocompatibility Antigens Class I, RNA-Binding Proteins, RNA Editing, Drug Resistance, Neoplasm, Receptors, G-Protein-Coupled, Cell Line, Tumor, Mice, Cell Cycle Checkpoints, Programmed Cell Death 1 Receptor, CRISPR-Cas Systems

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