Cited by 1,240Autophagy in Disease and TherapyCancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersImmunotherapy and Immune Responses

Autophagy promotes immune evasion of pancreatic cancer by degrading MHC-I

Open access
Yamamoto, Keisuke, Venida, Anthony, Yano, Julian, Biancur, Douglas E., Kakiuchi, Miwako, Gupta, Suprit, Sohn, Albert S. W., Mukhopadhyay, Subhadip +11 more·2020·Nature

Abstract

Immune evasion is a major obstacle for cancer treatment. Common mechanisms of evasion include impaired antigen presentation caused by mutations or loss of heterozygosity of the major histocompatibility complex class I (MHC-I), which has been implicated in resistance to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) therapy 1-3. However, in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), which is resistant to most therapies including ICB 4, mutations that cause loss of MHC-I are rarely found 5 despite the frequent downregulation of MHC-I expression 6-8. Here we show that, in PDAC, MHC-I molecules are selectively targeted for lysosomal degradation by an autophagy-dependent mechanism that involves the autophagy cargo receptor NBR1. PDAC cells display reduced expression of MHC-I at the cell surface and instead demonstrate predominant localization within autophagosomes and lysosomes. Notably, inhibition of autophagy restores surface levels of MHC-I and leads to improved antigen presentation, enhanced anti-tumour T cell responses and reduced tumour growth in syngeneic host mice. Accordingly, the anti-tumour effects of autophagy inhibition are reversed by depleting CD8+ T cells or reducing surface expression of MHC-I. Inhibition of autophagy, either genetically or pharmacologically with chloroquine, synergizes with dual ICB therapy (anti-PD1 and anti-CTLA4 antibodies), and leads to an enhanced anti-tumour immune response. Our findings demonstrate a role for enhanced autophagy or lysosome function in immune evasion by selective targeting of MHC-I molecules for degradation, and provide a rationale for the combination of autophagy inhibition and dual ICB therapy as a therapeutic strategy against PDAC.

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/s41586-020-2229-5

Cites

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?

  • ICIs combined with autophagy inhibition showed encouraging efficacy in KRASG12D-mutant PDAC models.

    “Moreover, ICIs were found to have encouraging efficacy in these models when combined with autophagy inhibition164.”
  • In KRASG12D-mutant PDAC models, MHC I is degraded through autophagy; inhibiting autophagy increases MHC I expression, antigen presentation, cytotoxic T cell activation and antitumour immunity.

    “In models of KRASG12D-mutant PDAC, MHC I is degraded in an autophagy-dependent manner, with inhibition of autophagy enhancing MHC I expression, antigen presentation, cytotoxic T cell activation and subsequent antitumour immunity164.”
  • MHC-I downregulation is a major mechanism by which cancer cells escape immune detection.

    “Major histocompatibility complex I (MHC-I) down-regulation is a major mechanism by which cancer cells escape detection by the immune system226”

    From Pancreatic cancer: Advances and challenges (2023) · cites this paper as [226]

  • In specific circumstances, autophagy in malignant cells may subvert immunosurveillance by degrading MHC class I molecules or dampening radiotherapy-induced type 1 IFN responses necessary for immune recognition of cancer cells.

    “In addition, in specific circumstances, autophagy in malignant cells may subvert immuno-surveillance, for instance, by degrading major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class I molecules, 167 or by dampening radiotherapy-induced type 1 interferon (IFN) responses necessary for the immune recognition of cancer cells.168”

    From Meta-hallmarks of aging and cancer (2023) · cites this paper as [167]

  • Pancreatic ductal carcinoma tumors expressing an ATG4B dominant-negative mutant exhibit increased sensitivity to CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocyte-mediated lysis.

    “Pancreatic ductal carcinoma tumors expressing an ATG4B dominant‐negative mutant exhibit increased sensitivity to CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL)‐mediated lysis (Yamamoto et al, 2020).”

    From Autophagy in major human diseases (2021) · cites this paper as Yamamoto et al, 2020

Self-check

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

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

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 58 · Cited by 1,240

Authors
Yamamoto, K., Venida, A., Yano, J., Biancur, D. E., Kakiuchi, M., Gupta, S., Sohn, A. S. W., Mukhopadhyay, S., Lin, E. Y., Parker, S. J., Banh, R. S., Paulo, J. A., Wen, K. W., Debnath, J., Kim, G. E., Mancias, J. D., Fearon, D. T., Perera, R. M., & Kimmelman, A. C.
Affiliations
  • NYU Langone’s Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center (US)
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Columbia University Irving Medical Center (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
  • University of Cambridge (GB)
Corresponding author
  • Perera, Rushika M.
  • Kimmelman, Alec C.
Venue
Nature
Published
2020-04-22
Volume
581
Issue
7806
Pages
100-105
ISSN
  • 0028-0836 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-4687
OpenAlex
W3020766569
Cited by
1,240
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 180 · 2025: 208 · 2024: 229 · 2023: 206 · 2022: 179 · 2021: 184 · 2020: 54
FWCI
113.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion)
  • Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Institutional Repository (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA188048, R35CA232124, F99CA245822, DP2CA216364, T32CA009161, R01CA157490, R01CA126792, P01CA117969, P30CA016087)
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM095567, R01GM132129, T32GM008568)
  • National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (P30DK063720)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Autophagy in Disease and Therapy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immunotherapy and Immune Responses
Keywords
autophagy, MHC class I, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, immune evasion, antigen presentation, NBR1, lysosomal degradation, autophagy inhibition, chloroquine, immune checkpoint blockade, anti-PD-1, anti-CTLA-4, CD8+ T cells, autophagy-lysosome system
MeSH terms
Adenocarcinoma, Animals, Autophagy, Chloroquine, Female, Humans, Lysosomes, Male, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Histocompatibility Antigens Class I, Antigen Presentation, CD8-Positive T-Lymphocytes, Tumor Escape, Carcinoma, Pancreatic Ductal, Cell Line, Tumor, Intracellular Signaling Peptides and Proteins, Mice, Cell Cycle Checkpoints

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