Cited by 152Cancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 56 of the 58 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 22 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Targeting HIF-1α abrogates PD-L1–mediated immune evasion in tumor microenvironment but promotes tolerance in normal tissues

Open access

Abstract

A combination of anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1/PD-L1 is the most effective cancer immunotherapy but causes high incidence of immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Here we report that targeting of HIF-1α suppressed PD-L1 expression on tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating myeloid cells, but unexpectedly induced PD-L1 in normal tissues by an IFN-γ-dependent mechanism. Targeting the HIF-1α/PD-L1 axis in tumor cells reactivated tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and caused tumor rejection. The HIF-1α inhibitor echinomycin potentiated the cancer immunotherapeutic effects of anti-CTLA-4 therapy, with efficacy comparable to that of anti-CTLA-4 plus anti-PD-1 antibodies. However, while anti-PD-1 exacerbated irAEs triggered by ipilimumab, echinomycin protected mice against irAEs by increasing PD-L1 levels in normal tissues. Our data suggest that targeting HIF-1α fortifies the immune tolerance function of the PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint in normal tissues but abrogates its immune evasion function in the tumor microenvironment to achieve safer and more effective immunotherapy.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Targeting HIF-1α with liposomal echinomycin (LEM) suppresses PD-L1 in the tumor microenvironment and reactivates antitumor immunity, while unexpectedly inducing PD-L1 in normal tissues via IFN-γ. This differential regulation potentiates anti–CTLA-4 therapy without the irAE exacerbation seen with anti–PD-1.

Key findings

  • LEM reduced PD-L1 on tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating myeloid cells (M-MDSCs, PMN-MDSCs, and CD11b+CD11c+ cells, ~90% of which were F4/80+ TAMs), increased IFN-γ+CD8+ (Tc1) and IFN-γ+CD4+ (Th1) TILs, and inhibited tumor growth in immunocompetent but less so in immunodeficient mice.
  • LEM potentiated anti–CTLA-4 (9D9) therapy in 4T1, E0771, and MC38 models, with efficacy comparable to anti–CTLA-4 plus anti–PD-1; optimal efficacy required CD8+, NK, and CD4+ cells, with CD8+ cells most critical.
  • In normal tissues, LEM induced PD-L1 in liver, kidney, and intestine by an IFN-γ–dependent mechanism; in CTLA4h/h-KI mice, LEM protected against ipilimumab-induced intestinal leakage, and adding anti–IFN-γ increased the frequency of mice with leakage from 7.7% to 20.0%.
  • Anti–PD-1 abrogated LEM’s protection against ipilimumab-induced GI irAEs, whereas LEM protected mice by increasing normal-tissue PD-L1; the paper notes dual checkpoint blockade causes severe irAEs in 50%–90% of patients depending on setting.

Methods

  • Syngeneic mouse tumor models: 4T1 and E0771 breast cancer and MC38 colon adenocarcinoma in BALB/c, C57BL/6, and NSG mice; genetic tools included shHif1a, shPdl1, and conditional Hif1a knockout in T cells.
  • Treatments: liposomal echinomycin (LEM) i.v. at 0.15–0.25 mg/kg; anti–mouse CTLA-4 (9D9), anti–PD-1 (RMP1-14), anti–IFN-γ (XMG1.2), and depleting CD4/CD8/NK antibodies; readouts included flow cytometry, immunofluorescence, histology, and FITC-dextran intestinal permeability.
  • GI irAE model: 10-day-old human CTLA4-knockin mice received ipilimumab i.p. on days 10, 13, 16, and 19; FITC-dextran assay on day 32. Statistics used t tests, 1-way/2-way ANOVA with Sidak’s post hoc test, and Pearson correlation in Prism 8, with P < 0.05 significant.

Limitations

  • Stated: adult tumor-bearing mice tolerated high-dose anti–CTLA-4 without significant irAEs, so the irAE studies relied on young CTLA4h/h-KI mice.
  • Stated: it is unclear whether LEM promotes Tc1 expansion in vivo by cell-intrinsic HIF-1α targeting or indirectly by reducing regulatory T cells.
  • Evident: all efficacy and toxicity data are preclinical mouse models; no human clinical outcomes or patient data are reported.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1172/jci150846

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Figures

Figure 1 HIF-1α drives PD-L1 expression in tumor cells. (A) Western blot of HIF-1α protein in murine breast cancer cells. (B) Effect of echinomycin on PD-L1 expression in 4T1 or E0771. Tumor cells were treated with echinomycin (EM, 0.45 nM) or DMSO (vehicle) for 48 hours (1:1000 dilution). Flow cytometry histograms for PD-L1 staining are shown. (C) Effect of CoCl2 on PD-L1 expression in E0771 cells. E0771 cells were cultured as in B with CoCl2 (250 μM) or PBS and PD-L1 was measured by flow cytometry. (D) 4T1-HRE cells were treated for 24 hours with PBS or CoCl2 (250 μM). Flow cytometry histograms for EGFP intensity are shown. (E) BALB/c mice received 1 × 106 4T1-HRE cells (day 0). On day 21, tumors were dissociated and stained for PD-L1. The PD-L1 MFI is plotted for the tumor cells (gated on CD45–EGFP+ singlets) further divided into top/bottom 30th percentiles based on EGFP. The data are pooled from 3 experiments, presented as mean ± SEM, and were analyzed by Student’s t test. (F) 4T1, E0771, or MC38 cells were transplanted into BALB/c or C57BL/6 mice, which received vehicle or liposome-encapsulated echinomycin (LEM, 0.25 mg/kg) every other day for a total of 5 doses. Representative PD-L1 immunofluorescence staining is shown for tumor tissues (2 days after final dose). Blue, DAPI. Scale bars: 20 μm. (G–J) Effects of Hif1a shRNA on PD-L1 expression in E0771 cells in vitro. E0771 cells were transduced with lentivirus packaged with scrambled (sh-Scr) or Hif1a shRNA (sh-Hif1a) and cultured under normoxia for 48 hours with DMSO (–) or echinomycin (EM, 1.35 nM). Flow cytometry histograms of PD-L1 staining are shown, comparing effects of Hif1a knockdown (G) or effects of echinomycin between sh-Scr (H) and sh-Hif1a (I) cells. (J) The data are summarized, expressed as mean ± SEM of PD-L1 MFI for triplicate wells, and were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA with Sidak’s post hoc test. Data are representative of 3 independent experiments. ****P < 0.0001.
Figure 1 HIF-1α drives PD-L1 expression in tumor cells. (A) Western blot of HIF-1α protein in murine breast cancer cells. (B) Effect of echinomycin on PD-L1 expression in 4T1 or E0771. Tumor cells were treated with echinomycin (EM, 0.45 nM) or DMSO (vehicle) for 48 hours (1:1000 dilution). Flow cytometry histograms for PD-L1 staining are shown. (C) Effect of CoCl2 on PD-L1 expression in E0771 cells. E0771 cells were cultured as in B with CoCl2 (250 μM) or PBS and PD-L1 was measured by flow cytometry. (D) 4T1-HRE cells were treated for 24 hours with PBS or CoCl2 (250 μM). Flow cytometry histograms for EGFP intensity are shown. (E) BALB/c mice received 1 × 106 4T1-HRE cells (day 0). On day 21, tumors were dissociated and stained for PD-L1. The PD-L1 MFI is plotted for the tumor cells (gated on CD45–EGFP+ singlets) further divided into top/bottom 30th percentiles based on EGFP. The data are pooled from 3 experiments, presented as mean ± SEM, and were analyzed by Student’s t test. (F) 4T1, E0771, or MC38 cells were transplanted into BALB/c or C57BL/6 mice, which received vehicle or liposome-encapsulated echinomycin (LEM, 0.25 mg/kg) every other day for a total of 5 doses. Representative PD-L1 immunofluorescence staining is shown for tumor tissues (2 days after final dose). Blue, DAPI. Scale bars: 20 μm. (G–J) Effects of Hif1a shRNA on PD-L1 expression in E0771 cells in vitro. E0771 cells were transduced with lentivirus packaged with scrambled (sh-Scr) or Hif1a shRNA (sh-Hif1a) and cultured under normoxia for 48 hours with DMSO (–) or echinomycin (EM, 1.35 nM). Flow cytometry histograms of PD-L1 staining are shown, comparing effects of Hif1a knockdown (G) or effects of echinomycin between sh-Scr (H) and sh-Hif1a (I) cells. (J) The data are summarized, expressed as mean ± SEM of PD-L1 MFI for triplicate wells, and were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA with Sidak’s post hoc test. Data are representative of 3 independent experiments. ****P < 0.0001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Therapeutic effects of echinomycin on tumor growth in immunodeficient and immunocompetent mice. Three murine tumor lines were tested: 4T1, E0771, and MC38. For each, immunodeficient (NSG) and immunocompetent (BALB/c or C57BL/6) mice were inoculated (day 0), and treatment was initiated with control liposomes (vehicle) or echinomycin liposomes (LEM) on day 6 (blue arrows indicate a single treatment). Tumor growth kinetics were compared to deduce the role of adaptive immunity in the therapeutic effects of echinomycin. (A) Diagram of experimental design. (B) NSG and BALB/c mice received 4T1 cells (1 × 106/mouse) and were treated with vehicle or 0.15 mg/kg LEM (n = 10/group). Mean tumor volumes ± SEM are shown and were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA. The data are representative of 2 independent experiments. (C) NSG and C57BL/6 mice received E0771 cells (0.7 × 106/mouse) and were treated with vehicle or 0.25 mg/kg LEM (n = 5/group). Mean tumor volumes ± SEM are shown and were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA. The data are representative of 2 independent experiments. (D) NSG and C57BL/6 mice received MC38 cells (1 × 106/mouse) and were treated with vehicle or 0.15 mg/kg LEM (n = 5/group). Mean tumor volumes ± SEM are shown, which were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA. The data are representative of 2 independent experiments. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ****P < 0.0001.
Figure 2 Therapeutic effects of echinomycin on tumor growth in immunodeficient and immunocompetent mice. Three murine tumor lines were tested: 4T1, E0771, and MC38. For each, immunodeficient (NSG) and immunocompetent (BALB/c or C57BL/6) mice were inoculated (day 0), and treatment was initiated with control liposomes (vehicle) or echinomycin liposomes (LEM) on day 6 (blue arrows indicate a single treatment). Tumor growth kinetics were compared to deduce the role of adaptive immunity in the therapeutic effects of echinomycin. (A) Diagram of experimental design. (B) NSG and BALB/c mice received 4T1 cells (1 × 106/mouse) and were treated with vehicle or 0.15 mg/kg LEM (n = 10/group). Mean tumor volumes ± SEM are shown and were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA. The data are representative of 2 independent experiments. (C) NSG and C57BL/6 mice received E0771 cells (0.7 × 106/mouse) and were treated with vehicle or 0.25 mg/kg LEM (n = 5/group). Mean tumor volumes ± SEM are shown and were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA. The data are representative of 2 independent experiments. (D) NSG and C57BL/6 mice received MC38 cells (1 × 106/mouse) and were treated with vehicle or 0.15 mg/kg LEM (n = 5/group). Mean tumor volumes ± SEM are shown, which were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA. The data are representative of 2 independent experiments. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ****P < 0.0001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Effects of pharmacological and/or genetic targeting of HIF-1α on E0771 tumor growth in immunodeficient or immunocompetent mice. (A) Experimental design. Three sublines of E0771 were generated by lentiviral transduction: scrambled shRNA (sh-Scr), shRNA against Hif1a (sh-Hif1a), and sh-Pdl1. For each, 0.5 × 106 cells were orthotopically transplanted into NSG or C57BL/6 mice (day 0), which received vehicle or echinomycin (LEM, 0.25 mg/kg) starting on day 6. (B) Effects of Hif1a or Pdl1 knockdown on E0771 growth among immunodeficient or immunocompetent recipients. (C) Effects of vehicle or LEM on sh-Scr, sh-Hif1a, or sh-Pdl1 E0771 growth in immunocompetent recipients. (D) Effects of vehicle or LEM on sh-Scr, sh-Hif1a, or sh-Pdl1 E0771 growth in immunodeficient recipients. In the graphs, tumor volumes are plotted as the mean ± SEM for each group (n = 5/group), with significance determined by 2-way ANOVA, and the data shown are representative of 2 experiments. *P < 0.05; ***P < 0.001.
Figure 3 Effects of pharmacological and/or genetic targeting of HIF-1α on E0771 tumor growth in immunodeficient or immunocompetent mice. (A) Experimental design. Three sublines of E0771 were generated by lentiviral transduction: scrambled shRNA (sh-Scr), shRNA against Hif1a (sh-Hif1a), and sh-Pdl1. For each, 0.5 × 106 cells were orthotopically transplanted into NSG or C57BL/6 mice (day 0), which received vehicle or echinomycin (LEM, 0.25 mg/kg) starting on day 6. (B) Effects of Hif1a or Pdl1 knockdown on E0771 growth among immunodeficient or immunocompetent recipients. (C) Effects of vehicle or LEM on sh-Scr, sh-Hif1a, or sh-Pdl1 E0771 growth in immunocompetent recipients. (D) Effects of vehicle or LEM on sh-Scr, sh-Hif1a, or sh-Pdl1 E0771 growth in immunodeficient recipients. In the graphs, tumor volumes are plotted as the mean ± SEM for each group (n = 5/group), with significance determined by 2-way ANOVA, and the data shown are representative of 2 experiments. *P < 0.05; ***P < 0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Echinomycin potentiates therapeutic effect of anti–CTLA-4 antibody. In 4T1, E0771, or MC38 syngeneic tumor models, the effects of echinomycin (LEM) plus anti–CTLA-4 (9D9) on tumor growth were tested in comparison to either monotherapy or vehicle control. In E0771 and MC38 models, effect of 9D9 plus anti–PD-1 (RMP1-14) was also assessed. Treatment was initiated on day 6 after tumor cell inoculation, with single treatments indicated by the blue (LEM) and red arrows (mAbs). In the graphs, mean tumor volumes ± SEM are shown for each group and were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA. (A) Diagram of experimental design. (B) Effects of 9D9 plus LEM on syngeneic 4T1 tumor growth. BALB/c mice with 4T1 tumors received vehicle, LEM (0.15 mg/kg/dose), 9D9 (0.2 mg/mouse/dose), or combination (n = 10/group). Data shown for 1 of 3 independent experiments. ICIs, immune checkpoint inhibitors (mAbs). (C) Effects of 9D9 plus LEM on syngeneic E0771 growth. E0771 cells (0.5 × 106) were orthotopically transplanted into C57BL/6 mice, which received vehicle, LEM (0.25 mg/kg), and/or various mAbs (0.2 mg/mouse/dose) (n = 5/group). Representative data shown for 1 of 3 independent experiments. (D) Effects of 9D9 plus LEM on syngeneic MC38 growth. MC38 cells (1 × 106) were transplanted into the left flank of C57BL/6 mice. Mice received vehicle, LEM (0.15 mg/kg), and/or various mAbs (0.2 mg/mouse/dose) (n = 5/group). Representative data shown for 1 of 3 independent experiments. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001.
Figure 4 Echinomycin potentiates therapeutic effect of anti–CTLA-4 antibody. In 4T1, E0771, or MC38 syngeneic tumor models, the effects of echinomycin (LEM) plus anti–CTLA-4 (9D9) on tumor growth were tested in comparison to either monotherapy or vehicle control. In E0771 and MC38 models, effect of 9D9 plus anti–PD-1 (RMP1-14) was also assessed. Treatment was initiated on day 6 after tumor cell inoculation, with single treatments indicated by the blue (LEM) and red arrows (mAbs). In the graphs, mean tumor volumes ± SEM are shown for each group and were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA. (A) Diagram of experimental design. (B) Effects of 9D9 plus LEM on syngeneic 4T1 tumor growth. BALB/c mice with 4T1 tumors received vehicle, LEM (0.15 mg/kg/dose), 9D9 (0.2 mg/mouse/dose), or combination (n = 10/group). Data shown for 1 of 3 independent experiments. ICIs, immune checkpoint inhibitors (mAbs). (C) Effects of 9D9 plus LEM on syngeneic E0771 growth. E0771 cells (0.5 × 106) were orthotopically transplanted into C57BL/6 mice, which received vehicle, LEM (0.25 mg/kg), and/or various mAbs (0.2 mg/mouse/dose) (n = 5/group). Representative data shown for 1 of 3 independent experiments. (D) Effects of 9D9 plus LEM on syngeneic MC38 growth. MC38 cells (1 × 106) were transplanted into the left flank of C57BL/6 mice. Mice received vehicle, LEM (0.15 mg/kg), and/or various mAbs (0.2 mg/mouse/dose) (n = 5/group). Representative data shown for 1 of 3 independent experiments. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Echinomycin suppresses PD-L1 on tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating myeloid cells and expands the IFN-γ–producing CD8+ and CD4+ T cells with or without anti–CTLA-4 antibodies. C57BL/6 mice received E0771 cells (0.5 × 106/mouse) on day 0 followed by treatment with vehicle, echinomycin (LEM, 0.25 mg/kg/dose), anti–CTLA-4 (9D9, 0.2 mg/mouse/dose), or 9D9 plus LEM on days 6, 8, 10, and 12. On day 14, the tumors were analyzed by flow cytometry. (A–D) PD-L1 expression on tumor and tumor-associated myeloid cells. PD-L1 expression was analyzed on tumor cells (gated on live CD45– singlets) (A), M-MDSCs (gated on live CD45+CD11b+CD11c–Ly6ChiLy6G– singlets) (B), PMN-MDSCs (gated on live CD45+CD11b+CD11c–Ly6CintLy6G+ singlets) (C), or CD11c+ TAMs (gated on live CD45+CD11b+CD11c+ singlets) (D). Upper panels show representative histograms of PD-L1. In the lower panels, dot plots show the PD-L1 MFI for individual mice from 3 independent experiments (n = 5 mice/group/experiment). The data are presented as the mean ± SEM of PD-L1 MFI and were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple-comparison test (A) or by 2-tailed, unpaired Student’s t test (B–D). (E and F) Frequency of TILs producing IFN-γ. The frequencies of CD8+IFN-γ+ (Tc1) among total CD8+ TILs (E) and CD4+IFN-γ+ (Th1) among total CD4+ TILs (F) are shown. The tumor cell suspensions were cultured for 4 hours in the presence of PMA plus ionomycin and GolgiStop prior to staining. The dot plots show the Tc1 or Th1 cell frequencies for individual mice from 2 independent experiments (n = 5 mice/group/experiment), which were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple-comparison test. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001.
Figure 5 Echinomycin suppresses PD-L1 on tumor cells and tumor-infiltrating myeloid cells and expands the IFN-γ–producing CD8+ and CD4+ T cells with or without anti–CTLA-4 antibodies. C57BL/6 mice received E0771 cells (0.5 × 106/mouse) on day 0 followed by treatment with vehicle, echinomycin (LEM, 0.25 mg/kg/dose), anti–CTLA-4 (9D9, 0.2 mg/mouse/dose), or 9D9 plus LEM on days 6, 8, 10, and 12. On day 14, the tumors were analyzed by flow cytometry. (A–D) PD-L1 expression on tumor and tumor-associated myeloid cells. PD-L1 expression was analyzed on tumor cells (gated on live CD45– singlets) (A), M-MDSCs (gated on live CD45+CD11b+CD11c–Ly6ChiLy6G– singlets) (B), PMN-MDSCs (gated on live CD45+CD11b+CD11c–Ly6CintLy6G+ singlets) (C), or CD11c+ TAMs (gated on live CD45+CD11b+CD11c+ singlets) (D). Upper panels show representative histograms of PD-L1. In the lower panels, dot plots show the PD-L1 MFI for individual mice from 3 independent experiments (n = 5 mice/group/experiment). The data are presented as the mean ± SEM of PD-L1 MFI and were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple-comparison test (A) or by 2-tailed, unpaired Student’s t test (B–D). (E and F) Frequency of TILs producing IFN-γ. The frequencies of CD8+IFN-γ+ (Tc1) among total CD8+ TILs (E) and CD4+IFN-γ+ (Th1) among total CD4+ TILs (F) are shown. The tumor cell suspensions were cultured for 4 hours in the presence of PMA plus ionomycin and GolgiStop prior to staining. The dot plots show the Tc1 or Th1 cell frequencies for individual mice from 2 independent experiments (n = 5 mice/group/experiment), which were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple-comparison test. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 Echinomycin improves TIL function in anti–CTLA-4–treated mice and CD8+ TILs are critical for combination efficacy. (A–H) C57BL/6 mice received E0771 cells (0.5 × 106/mouse) on day 0 followed by treatment with vehicle, echinomycin (LEM, 0.25 mg/kg/dose), 9D9 (0.2 mg/mouse/dose), or 9D9 plus LEM on days 6, 8, and 10. On day 14, tumors were analyzed by flow cytometry. Each graph shows the frequencies of CD8+ or CD4+ subsets among TILs (gated on live CD45+CD3+CD8+CD4– singlets or live CD45+CD3+CD8–CD4+ singlets). Data are representative of 2 experiments and presented as the mean ± SEM of each group (n = 5/group), and were analyzed by unpaired, 2-tailed Student’s t test. (A and B) Frequencies of TILs expressing PD-1. (C and D) Frequencies of annexin V+ TILs. (E and F) Frequencies of CD8+ TILs expressing granzyme B or perforin. (G and H) Granzyme B and perforin expression in CD8+ TILs. (I and J) Granzyme B and perforin expression in CD4+ TILs. (J) Effect of depletion of CD4+, CD8+, or NK cells on tumor growth inhibition by 9D9 plus LEM in the syngeneic E0771 model. C57BL/6 mice received E0771 cells (0.5 × 106/mouse) on day 0. On day 5, the mice were randomized to receive depleting antibodies (500 μg of anti-CD4 [GK1.5], anti-CD8 [YTS169.4], anti-NK1.1 [PK136], or isotype control). All groups received 9D9 (200 μg) on day 6, and LEM (250 μg/kg) on days 6, 8, and 10. Mice received supplemental dose of depleting antibodies (200 μg) on days 8 and 10. The mean ± SEM tumor volumes are plotted on the y axes for each group (n = 5/group) and were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA. Representative data shown for 1 of 2 experiments. *P < 0.05; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001.
Figure 6 Echinomycin improves TIL function in anti–CTLA-4–treated mice and CD8+ TILs are critical for combination efficacy. (A–H) C57BL/6 mice received E0771 cells (0.5 × 106/mouse) on day 0 followed by treatment with vehicle, echinomycin (LEM, 0.25 mg/kg/dose), 9D9 (0.2 mg/mouse/dose), or 9D9 plus LEM on days 6, 8, and 10. On day 14, tumors were analyzed by flow cytometry. Each graph shows the frequencies of CD8+ or CD4+ subsets among TILs (gated on live CD45+CD3+CD8+CD4– singlets or live CD45+CD3+CD8–CD4+ singlets). Data are representative of 2 experiments and presented as the mean ± SEM of each group (n = 5/group), and were analyzed by unpaired, 2-tailed Student’s t test. (A and B) Frequencies of TILs expressing PD-1. (C and D) Frequencies of annexin V+ TILs. (E and F) Frequencies of CD8+ TILs expressing granzyme B or perforin. (G and H) Granzyme B and perforin expression in CD8+ TILs. (I and J) Granzyme B and perforin expression in CD4+ TILs. (J) Effect of depletion of CD4+, CD8+, or NK cells on tumor growth inhibition by 9D9 plus LEM in the syngeneic E0771 model. C57BL/6 mice received E0771 cells (0.5 × 106/mouse) on day 0. On day 5, the mice were randomized to receive depleting antibodies (500 μg of anti-CD4 [GK1.5], anti-CD8 [YTS169.4], anti-NK1.1 [PK136], or isotype control). All groups received 9D9 (200 μg) on day 6, and LEM (250 μg/kg) on days 6, 8, and 10. Mice received supplemental dose of depleting antibodies (200 μg) on days 8 and 10. The mean ± SEM tumor volumes are plotted on the y axes for each group (n = 5/group) and were analyzed by 2-way ANOVA. Representative data shown for 1 of 2 experiments. *P < 0.05; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 7 Echinomycin stimulates PD-L1 expression in irAE target organs to limit the infiltration of T cells caused by anti–CTLA-4 mAbs by an IFN-γ–dependent mechanism. E0771 cells (0.5 × 106) were transplanted into C57BL/6 mice (day 0), which were divided into 6 treatment groups (n = 5/group): vehicle, echinomycin (LEM), anti–CTLA-4 (9D9), 9D9 plus LEM, 9D9 plus LEM plus anti–IFN-γ (XMG1.2), and 9D9 plus anti–PD-1 (RMP1-14). LEM (0.25 mg/kg) or mAbs (0.2 mg/mouse/dose) were given on days 6, 8, 10, and 12. On day 14, the mice were perfused. Dissociated spleens were stimulated for 4 hours with PMA plus ionomycin and GolgiStop prior to flow cytometry. Liver and kidney tissues were fixed and immunofluorescently stained for indicated markers and with DAPI (blue). (A) PD-L1 expression in the tumor-bearing mice treated with different therapies. Representative PD-L1 immunofluorescence staining shown for kidney and liver tissues from indicated treatment groups. Scale bars: 20 μm. (B–D) T cell infiltration in the liver and kidney of tumor-bearing mice. (B) Representative CD3 immunofluorescence staining depicting T cell infiltration in kidney and liver tissues. Scale bars: 50 μm. (C and D) T cell infiltration was scored (scale of 0–4) in the kidney (C) and liver (D) tissues as follows: 0, normal/none; 1, minimal; 2, mild; 3, moderate; 4, severe. (E) Frequency of splenic T cells (gated on live CD45+CD3+CD8+CD4– singlets) among total hematopoietic cells (gated on live CD45+ singlets). (F) Frequency of splenic Tc1 cells among CD8+ T cells (gated on live CD45+CD3+CD8+CD4– singlets). (G) Frequency of splenic Th1 cells among CD4+ T cells (gated on live CD45+CD3+CD8–CD4+ singlets). (H) CD3 and cleaved caspase 3 staining in kidney and liver. Representative immunofluorescence images shown for kidney (upper) and liver tissues (lower) of mice that received 9D9 or 9D9 plus LEM. All data are representative of at least 2 independent experiments. Scale bar: 20 μm. In C–G, data are presented as the mean ± SEM, with each dot representing an individual mouse, and were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA with Sidak’s post hoc test. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001.
Figure 7 Echinomycin stimulates PD-L1 expression in irAE target organs to limit the infiltration of T cells caused by anti–CTLA-4 mAbs by an IFN-γ–dependent mechanism. E0771 cells (0.5 × 106) were transplanted into C57BL/6 mice (day 0), which were divided into 6 treatment groups (n = 5/group): vehicle, echinomycin (LEM), anti–CTLA-4 (9D9), 9D9 plus LEM, 9D9 plus LEM plus anti–IFN-γ (XMG1.2), and 9D9 plus anti–PD-1 (RMP1-14). LEM (0.25 mg/kg) or mAbs (0.2 mg/mouse/dose) were given on days 6, 8, 10, and 12. On day 14, the mice were perfused. Dissociated spleens were stimulated for 4 hours with PMA plus ionomycin and GolgiStop prior to flow cytometry. Liver and kidney tissues were fixed and immunofluorescently stained for indicated markers and with DAPI (blue). (A) PD-L1 expression in the tumor-bearing mice treated with different therapies. Representative PD-L1 immunofluorescence staining shown for kidney and liver tissues from indicated treatment groups. Scale bars: 20 μm. (B–D) T cell infiltration in the liver and kidney of tumor-bearing mice. (B) Representative CD3 immunofluorescence staining depicting T cell infiltration in kidney and liver tissues. Scale bars: 50 μm. (C and D) T cell infiltration was scored (scale of 0–4) in the kidney (C) and liver (D) tissues as follows: 0, normal/none; 1, minimal; 2, mild; 3, moderate; 4, severe. (E) Frequency of splenic T cells (gated on live CD45+CD3+CD8+CD4– singlets) among total hematopoietic cells (gated on live CD45+ singlets). (F) Frequency of splenic Tc1 cells among CD8+ T cells (gated on live CD45+CD3+CD8+CD4– singlets). (G) Frequency of splenic Th1 cells among CD4+ T cells (gated on live CD45+CD3+CD8–CD4+ singlets). (H) CD3 and cleaved caspase 3 staining in kidney and liver. Representative immunofluorescence images shown for kidney (upper) and liver tissues (lower) of mice that received 9D9 or 9D9 plus LEM. All data are representative of at least 2 independent experiments. Scale bar: 20 μm. In C–G, data are presented as the mean ± SEM, with each dot representing an individual mouse, and were analyzed by 1-way ANOVA with Sidak’s post hoc test. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001; ****P < 0.0001.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 8 Echinomycin induces PD-L1 to counter ipilimumab-induced GI irAEs by an IFN-γ–dependent mechanism. (A) Experimental design. Ipilimumab (Ipi.) was used to induce GI irAEs in CTLA4h/h pups (detailed in Methods). Single dose of ipilimumab and other agents are indicated in the diagram by arrows (red, mAbs; blue, vehicle/LEM). ICIs, immune checkpoint inhibitors (mAbs). (B and C) Representative immunofluorescence images showing T cell infiltration (B) or PD-L1 expression (C) in jejunum of vehicle- or ipilimumab-treated mice. (D) Association of intestinal PD-L1 expression with GI irAEs determined by FITC-dextran assay. Intestinal PD-L1 expression was scored as negative/low (n = 18) or high (n = 21) based on immunofluorescence, and serum FITC-dextran intensity is presented as the mean ± SEM for each group, analyzed by Student’s t test. Aggregate data shown from 4 experiments. (E–G) Effects of LEM, anti–PD-1 (RMP1-14), and anti–IFN-γ (XMG1.2) in the GI irAE model. Mice were grouped as follows to receive therapies based on the experimental design depicted in A: vehicle (n = 33), LEM (n = 27), ipilimumab (n = 33), ipilimumab plus LEM (n = 26), ipilimumab plus RMP1-14 (n = 27), ipilimumab plus LEM plus RMP1-14 (n = 28), and ipilimumab plus LEM plus XMG1.2 (n = 15). (E) Serum FITC-dextran intensity shown as mean ± SEM for individual mice pooled from 3 independent experiments. GI irAE incidence corresponding to each group is annotated (percentages); dotted line represents the threshold for the determination of GI irAEs. Statistics were determined by 2-tailed, unpaired Student’s t test. (F) Representative H&E images from intestines of mice receiving different therapies. Panel iv shows cellular debris and necrosis in lamina propria and epithelium (arrow). (G) Representative immunofluorescence images showing PD-L1 staining in jejunum of mice from different treatment groups. Scale bars: 50 μm (B, C, and G). (H) Flow cytometry analysis of PD-L1 expression in intestinal epithelial cells (gated on live CD45–cytokeratin+ singlets) from mice treated with ipilimumab (n = 6) or ipilimumab plus LEM (n = 8). Data shown as mean ± SEM of the PD-L1 MFI for each mouse, and were analyzed by 2-tailed, unpaired Student’s t test. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001.
Figure 8 Echinomycin induces PD-L1 to counter ipilimumab-induced GI irAEs by an IFN-γ–dependent mechanism. (A) Experimental design. Ipilimumab (Ipi.) was used to induce GI irAEs in CTLA4h/h pups (detailed in Methods). Single dose of ipilimumab and other agents are indicated in the diagram by arrows (red, mAbs; blue, vehicle/LEM). ICIs, immune checkpoint inhibitors (mAbs). (B and C) Representative immunofluorescence images showing T cell infiltration (B) or PD-L1 expression (C) in jejunum of vehicle- or ipilimumab-treated mice. (D) Association of intestinal PD-L1 expression with GI irAEs determined by FITC-dextran assay. Intestinal PD-L1 expression was scored as negative/low (n = 18) or high (n = 21) based on immunofluorescence, and serum FITC-dextran intensity is presented as the mean ± SEM for each group, analyzed by Student’s t test. Aggregate data shown from 4 experiments. (E–G) Effects of LEM, anti–PD-1 (RMP1-14), and anti–IFN-γ (XMG1.2) in the GI irAE model. Mice were grouped as follows to receive therapies based on the experimental design depicted in A: vehicle (n = 33), LEM (n = 27), ipilimumab (n = 33), ipilimumab plus LEM (n = 26), ipilimumab plus RMP1-14 (n = 27), ipilimumab plus LEM plus RMP1-14 (n = 28), and ipilimumab plus LEM plus XMG1.2 (n = 15). (E) Serum FITC-dextran intensity shown as mean ± SEM for individual mice pooled from 3 independent experiments. GI irAE incidence corresponding to each group is annotated (percentages); dotted line represents the threshold for the determination of GI irAEs. Statistics were determined by 2-tailed, unpaired Student’s t test. (F) Representative H&E images from intestines of mice receiving different therapies. Panel iv shows cellular debris and necrosis in lamina propria and epithelium (arrow). (G) Representative immunofluorescence images showing PD-L1 staining in jejunum of mice from different treatment groups. Scale bars: 50 μm (B, C, and G). (H) Flow cytometry analysis of PD-L1 expression in intestinal epithelial cells (gated on live CD45–cytokeratin+ singlets) from mice treated with ipilimumab (n = 6) or ipilimumab plus LEM (n = 8). Data shown as mean ± SEM of the PD-L1 MFI for each mouse, and were analyzed by 2-tailed, unpaired Student’s t test. *P < 0.05; **P < 0.01; ***P < 0.001.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

75 Own result · 30 Own interpretation · 16 Not checked yet · 5 Own method · 1 No basis given

Verify all 22 references — free account

Show all 84 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 30
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 15
43 of 43
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Clinical development of echinomycin for solid tumors has met with minimal success.

    “However, clinical development of echinomycin for solid tumors has met with minimal success.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The current approach that overcomes tumor evasion of host immunity also disables the immune tolerance checkpoint, leading to significant irAEs, particularly when used in conjunction with anti–CTLA-4 antibodies.

    “However, the current approach that overcomes tumor evasion of host immunity also disables the immune tolerance checkpoint, leading to significant irAEs, particularly when used in conjunction with anti–CTLA-4 antibodies.”
2 of 2

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 58 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Bailey, C. M., Liu, Y., Liu, M., Du, X., Devenport, M., Zheng, P., Liu, Y., & Wang, Y.
Affiliations
University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
Corresponding author
  • Liu, Yang
  • Wang, Yin
Venue
Journal of Clinical Investigation
Published
2022-05-02
Volume
132
Issue
9
ISSN
  • 0021-9738 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-8238
OpenAlex
W4214881895
Cited by
151
References
58
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 45 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 24 · 2022: 10
FWCI
12.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Investigation (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health (CA171972, CA183030, CA219150, CA227671)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Immunotherapy and Immune Responses
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism
Keywords
HIF-1α, PD-L1, immune evasion, tumor microenvironment, immune-related adverse events, CTLA-4, PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint, echinomycin, interferon-gamma, tumor-infiltrating myeloid cells, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, cancer immunotherapy
MeSH terms
Animals, Echinomycin, Immune Tolerance, Neoplasms, Lymphocytes, Tumor-Infiltrating, Mice, Hypoxia-Inducible Factor 1, alpha Subunit, Immune Evasion, Tumor Microenvironment, B7-H1 Antigen

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.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

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