Cited by 179Cancer Immunotherapy and BiomarkersGut microbiota and healthBacterial Cancer Therapy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 110 of the 110 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Gut microbiome modulates efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors

Open access

Abstract

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) therapy is a novel strategy for cancer treatments in recent years. However, it was observed that most patients treated with ICIs could not get benefit from the therapy, which led to the limitation of clinical application. Motivated by potent and durable efficacy of ICIs, oncologists endeavor to explore the mechanisms of resistance to ICIs and increase the drug sensitivity. It is known that heterogeneity of gut microbiome in populations may result in different outcomes of therapy. In xenograft model, bacteria in gut have been proved as a crucial factor regulating immunotherapy efficacy. And the similar phenomenon was obtained in patients. In this review, we summarized relevant advancements about gut microbiome and ICIs. Furthermore, we focused on modulatory function of gut microbiome in ICIs therapy and possible antitumor mechanism of specific commensals in ICIs treatment. We propose that gut microbiome is an important predictive factor, and manipulation of gut microbiome is feasible to elevate response rate in ICIs therapy.

Overview

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 · 10.1186/s13045-018-0592-6

Cites

110 of 110 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1 The potential mechanism of gut microbiome regulating ICIs efficacy. Firstly, the abundance of CTLA-4 on Tregs is upregulated by some bacteria and metabolites at baseline, which increases sensitivity to CTLA-4 blockade. Secondly, gut microbiota enhances the function of DCs. For example, Bifidobacterium promotes DCs maturation and decreases activation threshold, elevates recruitment and function of T cells by interaction with DCs. Thirdly, administration of Akkermansia muciniphila and Enterococcus hirae results in elevated CD4+ TCM in tumor bed. Fourthly, commensal bacteria are sensed by APCs, inducing pTh17 and Th1 differentiation, which influence tumor immunity by lymphocyte homing and recirculation. Fifthly, SCFAs are utilized by immune cells and gut epithelial cells as source of energy. Lastly, molecule mimicry theory and adjuvant effect participate in immune response
Fig. 1 The potential mechanism of gut microbiome regulating ICIs efficacy. Firstly, the abundance of CTLA-4 on Tregs is upregulated by some bacteria and metabolites at baseline, which increases sensitivity to CTLA-4 blockade. Secondly, gut microbiota enhances the function of DCs. For example, Bifidobacterium promotes DCs maturation and decreases activation threshold, elevates recruitment and function of T cells by interaction with DCs. Thirdly, administration of Akkermansia muciniphila and Enterococcus hirae results in elevated CD4+ TCM in tumor bed. Fourthly, commensal bacteria are sensed by APCs, inducing pTh17 and Th1 differentiation, which influence tumor immunity by lymphocyte homing and recirculation. Fifthly, SCFAs are utilized by immune cells and gut epithelial cells as source of energy. Lastly, molecule mimicry theory and adjuvant effect participate in immune responseCC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 110 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 179

Metadata

Authors
Yi, M., Yu, S., Qin, S., Liu, Q., Xu, H., Zhao, W., Chu, Q., & Wu, K.
Affiliations
Tongji Hospital (CN)
Corresponding author
  • Chu, Qian
  • Wu, Kongming
Venue
Journal of Hematology & Oncology
Published
2018-03-27
Volume
11
Issue
1
Pages
47-47
ISSN
1756-8722 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2794616539
Cited by
179
References
110
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 23 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 10
FWCI
2.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Hematology & Oncology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (81572608 and 81172422, 81672984)
  • Wuhan Science and Technology Bureau (2017060201010170)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Gut microbiota and health
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Biotechnology › Bacterial Cancer Therapy
Keywords
gut microbiota, immune checkpoint inhibitors, immunotherapy efficacy, cancer immunotherapy, treatment resistance, predictive biomarkers, commensal bacteria, anticancer mechanism, microbiome manipulation
MeSH terms
Gastrointestinal Microbiome, Humans, 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