| Literature DB >> 34276698 |
Margot Lavy1, Vanessa Gauttier1, Nicolas Poirier1, Sophie Barillé-Nion2, Christophe Blanquart2.
Abstract
Inflammation is a fundamental physiological response orchestrated by innate immune cells to restore tissue homeostasis. Specialized pro-resolving mediators (SPMs) are involved in active resolution of inflammation but when inflammation is incomplete, chronic inflammation creates a favorable environment that fuels carcinogenesis and cancer progression. Conventional cancer therapy also strengthens cancer-related inflammation by inducing massive tumor cell death that activate surrounding immune-infiltrating cells such as tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs). Macrophages are key actors of both inflammation and its active resolution due to their plastic phenotype. In line with this high plasticity, macrophages can be hijacked by cancer cells to support tumor progression and immune escape, or therapy resistance. Impaired resolution of cancer-associated inflammation supported by TAMs may thus reinforces tumor progression. From this perspective, recent evidence suggests that stimulating macrophage's pro-resolving functions using SPMs can promote inflammation resolution in cancer and improve anticancer treatments. Thus, TAMs' re-education toward an antitumor phenotype by using SPMs opens a new line of attack in cancer treatment. Here, we review SPMs' anticancer capacities with special attention regarding their effects on TAMs. We further discuss how this new therapeutic approach could be envisioned in cancer therapy.Entities:
Keywords: cancer; inflammation; macrophages; phagocytosis; specialized pro-resolving mediators; tumor microenvironment
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34276698 PMCID: PMC8278519 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.702785
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
Figure 1Lipid mediators’ time-course, synthesis and biological actions. Lipid mediators are produced sequentially through action of specific enzymes. Pro-inflammatory lipid mediators (prostaglandins and leukotrienes) are first produced during inflammation initiation. During inflammation resolution, a switch in lipid mediator synthesis occurred and promote SPMs’ synthesis. Each SPM execute its functions by binding to a specific receptor. The receptors for LXB4, RvE2, RvE3, RvD4 have not been characterized yet (14–17).
Figure 2Diversity of macrophages’ phenotypes. (A) Monocytes can be differentiated in vitro either in pro-inflammatory M1-like macrophages or in anti-inflammatory M2-like macrophages upon various external stimuli. M1-like macrophages are involved in microbicidal and tumoricidal activities. M2-like macrophages have pro-resolving functions and are involved in tissue repair. In cancer settings, TAM, associated to a M2-like phenotype, support tumor progression and mitigate tumor response to anticancer treatments through production of proteases, angiogenic and growth factors. (B) During efferocytosis of apoptotic cells, macrophages undergo a reprogramming toward a pro-resolving phenotype. Macrophages receive an important metabolic load from these engulfed cells that induce metabolic modifications such as activation of the putrescine pathway or increased glycolysis that supports actin polymerization and cell clearance. Pro-resolving macrophages express 12/15-LOX and turn off production of pro-inflammatory cytokines for production of IL-10, TGF-β and IFN-β that participate in inflammation resolution.
Figure 3TAMs execute diverse activities during tumor initiation and its immune escape. (1) Macrophages are first recruited in tumor under the action of chemokines secreted by tumor cells. Some factors such as retinoic acid (113) and IL-6 (114) favor monocytes differentiation toward macrophages instead of dendritic cells. (2) Macrophages become TAMs with immunosuppressive activity, in particular due to sphingosine 1 phosphatase (S1P) released by dying tumor cells. (3) TAMs support local immunosuppression by: secreting immunosuppressive cytokines, inhibiting effector T-cells (115) and NK cells (116), recruiting Tregs though CCL22-CCR4 axis or MDSC through CCL2-CCR2. (4) Under hypoxia, macrophages produce various cytokines, including CCL-18 (117) triggered by tumor cells at the tumor invasive front, and proteases that induce EMT in tumor cells and favor their invasion and migration. Additional paracrine loops between tumor cells and TAMs, as described for EGF and CSF-1, amplify TAM-dependent cancer cell motility (94, 118). (5) Finally, TAMs contribute to anticancer treatment resistance by secreting factors protecting tumor cells from death.
SPMs’ in vitro effects on human macrophages in inflammatory contexts.
| Macrophages | SPMs | Effects | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Human monocyte-derived macrophages (M1-like, M2-like) | LXA4 (250nM) | Protect macrophages from apoptosis | ( |
| LXA4 (0.1-10nM) | Increase phagocytosis of zymosan particles | ( | |
| Human monocytes | LXA4 | Inhibit monocytes’ apoptosis | ( |
| Primary human macrophages | LXA4 | Increase phagocytosis | ( |
| Human monocyte-derived macrophages (M1-like) | RvD1 (0.1-1nM) | Increase phagocytosis of microbial particles and apoptotic PMN | ( |
| RvD1 (0.1-10nM) | Increase phagocytosis of zymosan particles | ( | |
| RvD1 (10nM) | Switch M1-like to M2-like macrophages | ( | |
| Human alveolar macrophages | RvD1 and RvD2 (100 nM) | Increase phagocytosis of microbial particles (E. coli) | ( |
| Primary human macrophages | RvD1 (10nM) | Polarize resting primary macrophages and repolarize M1-like macrophages to a pro-resolving phenotype | ( |
| M1-like macrophages | RvD5 (10nM) | Increase phagocytosis of microbial particles | ( |
| Human monocyte-derived macrophages (M1-like) | RvE1 (10nM) | Increase phagocytosis of microbial particles | ( |
| Primary human macrophages | RvE1 (10nM) | Induce a pro-resolving phenotype | ( |
| Human monocyte derived macrophages (GM-CSF) | RvE2 (1-10nM) | Increase phagocytosis of zymosan particles | ( |
| Human macrophages (M2-like) | MaR1 (1 nM) | Increase efferocytosis of apoptotic PMN | ( |
| Human monocyte-derived macrophages (M1-like, M2-like) | MaR1 (10pM-10nM) | Increase phagocytosis (E. coli, zymosan) and efferocytosis of apoptotic PMN | ( |
| Human monocyte-derived macrophages (M1-like) | MaR1 (10 nM) | Switch M1-like to M2-like macrophages | ( |
| Human macrophages | PD-1 | Increase macrophages’ efferocytosis of apoptotic PMN | ( |
Bold, SPM analogs or receptor agonists.
SPMs’ effects on human macrophages in a cancer context.
| Macrophages | SPMs | Effects | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Human monocyte-derived macrophages | RvD1 – RvD2 – RvE1 (1pM – 100nM) | Increase phagocytosis of tumor cell debris and reduce pro-inflammatory cytokine secretion | ( |
| Human monocyte-derived TAM | LX4 | Suppress TAM phenotype | ( |
| Human monocyte-derived macrophages | LXA4 - RvD1 – RvD3 (AT-SPM) (100pM-100nM) | Increase phagocytosis of tumor cell debris and reduce pro-inflammatory cytokines secretion | ( |
| THP-1 monocytes | RvD1-RvD2 (1-100nM) | Suppress TAM phenotype | ( |
Bold, SPM analogs or receptor agonists.
List of publications reporting SPMs’ antitumor activity in murine cancer models.
| SPMs | Cancer Models | Molecules | Effects | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| LXA4 | Colorectal cancer | Native | Suppress early development of colorectal cancer (Mϕ) | ( |
|
| Inhibit tumor growth | ( | ||
| Hepatocellular carcinoma |
| Inhibit tumor growth | ( | |
|
| Inhibit EMT and metastasis (Mϕ) | ( | ||
|
| Inhibit proliferation, invasion and angiogenesis of cancer cells (Mϕ) | ( | ||
| Papillomas | Native | Inflammation resolution | ( | |
| Melanoma |
| Inhibit tumor growth | ( | |
|
| Decrease monocyte infiltration in tumor (Mϕ) | ( | ||
| Pancreatic |
| Reduce liver metastases | ( | |
| RvD1 | Hepatocellular carcinoma | Native | Block CAF pro-tumor effects on tumor growth and metastases | ( |
| Native | Prevent liver injury and cancer transformation | ( | ||
| Melanoma | Native | Reduce pulmonary metastasis | ( | |
| RvD2 | OSCC | Native | Tumor growth reduction (Mϕ) | ( |
| Lung, Melanoma | Native | Reduce pulmonary metastasis | ( | |
| RvE1 | Hepatocellular carcinoma | Native | Prevent liver injury and cancer transformation | ( |
| RvD2, RvD3, RvD4 | Lung, Lymphoma, Melanoma | Native | Reduce metastases and improve survival (preoperative context) | ( |
| RvD1, RvD2, RvE1 | Lung, Pancreatic cancer, Prostate | Native | Inhibit tumor growth | ( |
| RvD1, RvD3 | Lung |
| Inhibit tumor growth | ( |
| MaR1 | Skin inflammation | Native | Prevent cancer risk following UVB irradiation | ( |
Bold, SPM analogs or receptor agonists.
Please refer to Prevete et al. (182) for previous studies reported SPMs’ anticancer effects (182). Mϕ indicated studies where SPM anticancer effects were mediated through counter regulation of TAM protumor functions or TAM repolarization.
Figure 4SPMs as anticancer agents to resolve cancer-associated inflammation. Various extrinsic factors such as surgery and anticancer treatments as well as intrinsic hypoxia contribute to local inflammation within tumors. TAMs largely contribute to fuel tumor progression by various functions described in . Use of SPM would resolve cancer-associated inflammation by repolarizing TAMs toward a pro-resolving phenotype with increased efferocytosis capabilities. As a result, SPMs could induce tumor regression and prevent further metastasis establishment.
SPMs or AT-SPM analogs and receptor agonists.
| Nature | SPMs | Name | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Analogs | LXA4 | 15(R/S)-methyl-LXA4, 16-phenoxy-LXA4 | ( |
| PD-1 | 22-F-PD1 | ( | |
| MaR1 | 7S-MaR1 | ( | |
| RvE1 | 19-( | ( | |
| AT-SPM | LXA4 | ATL-1 (15-epi-16-(para-fluoro)phenoxy-LXA4) | ( |
| Receptor | FPR2/LXA4 | BML-111 (5(S),6®,7- trihydroxyheptanoic acid methyl ester) | ( |
| GPR32 | NCGC00120943 (C1A), NCGC00135472 (C2A) | ( | |
| ChemR23 | Monoclonal antibody | ( |
Here are listed SPM mimetics, including analogs, AT-SPM analogs and receptor agonists that show increased stability and biological activities in inflammation resolution settings.
Therapeutic approaches for the development and use of SPM mimetics in cancer treatments.
| Disadvantages | Advantages | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Native | Short half-life | Biological activities | |
| Analogs | Short half-life | Increased Stability | ||
| Biological activities | ||||
| Receptor agonists | Small molecules | Short half-life | Increased Stability | |
| Easy to develop | ||||
| Biological activities | ||||
| Monoclonal antibodies | Manufacturing costs | Long exposure for chronic disease | ||
| Easy to develop | ||||
| Specificity and selectivity | ||||
SPMs and SPM mimetics tested in human.
| SPMs | Analog/Receptor agonist | Clinical trials | Effects | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| RvE1 | RX-10045 | Combined Phase I and II in patients with dry eye symptoms | Safe and well tolerated | NCT00799552 |
| LXA4 | 15(R/S)‐methyl‐lipoxin A4
| Study in Infantine eczema | Well tolerated | ( |
| LXA4 | BLXA4-ME | Phase I/II in patients with gingivitis (on going) | Assess safety and preliminary efficacy | NCT02342691 |
| LXA4 | LXA4 | Study in patients with asthma | LXA4 attenuated leukotriene C4-induced bronchoconstriction | ( |
| LXA4 | 5(S),6(R)-LXA4 methyl ester | Pilot study in asthmatic children | Safe and well tolerated | ( |