==== Front
J Clin Invest
J Clin Invest
J Clin Invest
The Journal of Clinical Investigation
0021-9738
1558-8238
American Society for Clinical Investigation

170762
10.1172/JCI170762
Review
Enhancing immunotherapy response in melanoma: myeloid-derived suppressor cells as a therapeutic target
Ozbay Kurt Feyza Gul 1234
http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1186-5416
Lasser Samantha samantha.lasser@medma.uni-heidelberg.de
1234
http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5594-0273
Arkhypov Ihor ihor.arkhypov@medma.uni-heidelberg.de
1234
Utikal Jochen j.utikal@dkfz.de
123
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9360-6383
Umansky Viktor v.umansky@dkfz.de
1234
1 Skin Cancer Unit, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany.
2 Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
3 DKFZ–Hector Cancer Institute at the University Medical Center Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.
4 Mannheim Institute for Innate Immunoscience (MI3), Medical Faculty Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karls University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany.
Address correspondence to: Viktor Umansky, Skin Cancer Unit, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Im Neuenheimer Feld 280, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany. Phone: 49.621.3833773; Email: v.umansky@dkfz.de.
Authorship note: JU and VU are co–senior authors.

3 7 2023
3 7 2023
3 7 2023
133 13 e170762© 2023 Ozbay Kurt et al.
2023
Ozbay Kurt et al.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This article is available online at https://www.jci.org/articles/view/170762
Despite the remarkable success of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) in melanoma treatment, resistance to them remains a substantial clinical challenge. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) represent a heterogeneous population of myeloid cells that can suppress antitumor immune responses mediated by T and natural killer cells and promote tumor growth. They are major contributors to ICI resistance and play a crucial role in creating an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. Therefore, targeting MDSCs is considered a promising strategy to improve the therapeutic efficacy of ICIs. This Review describes the mechanism of MDSC-mediated immune suppression, preclinical and clinical studies on MDSC targeting, and potential strategies for inhibiting MDSC functions to improve melanoma immunotherapy.
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

Melanoma accounts for the vast majority of skin cancer–related deaths. It is known for its high immunogenicity, which makes the disease a suitable target for immunotherapies (1) that deploy the patient’s own immune system to fight against tumors (2). Earlier immunotherapeutic approaches involved the administration of cytokines and interferons, which displayed minimal benefit and considerable toxicities. The application of negative immune checkpoint molecules such as cytotoxic T lymphocyte–associated protein 4 (CTLA-4) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) as therapeutic targets has revolutionized cancer immunotherapy. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) were first administered to patients with advanced melanoma and showed promising results (3). Yet many patients develop diverse resistance mechanisms that decrease the response rate to the treatment (4).

Myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) represent a heterogeneous population of myeloid cells with immunosuppressive functions and are known to be enriched in various types of cancer, including melanoma (5–7). The clinical relevance of MDSCs has gained attention owing to the reports showing that increased levels of MDSCs positively correlated with unfavorable clinical outcome and poor survival in different cancer entities (8, 9). Moreover, several reports highlighted a correlation between high MDSC numbers and poor response to ICI. This is attributed to the ability of MDSCs to foster an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment, which hinders the efficacy of ICIs (10–12).

Current strategies aimed at targeting MDSCs are not entirely effective because of the heterogeneity of these myeloid cells and the complexity of their immunosuppressive function (7). Therapies that included ICIs in combination with MDSC blockers showed potential, yet the absence of definitive markers to identify MDSCs poses a formidable challenge (13). Although several potential MDSC markers and novel factors involved in MDSC accumulation, immunosuppressive functions, and recruitment have been identified, their clinical utility remains to be elucidated.

In this Review, we present current knowledge on the role of MDSCs in the immunotherapy of melanoma. We describe the accumulation, infiltration, and immunosuppressive functions of MDSCs in the tumor microenvironment (TME) as well as existing therapeutic strategies to target them in melanoma-bearing hosts. A special focus is placed on preclinical studies and clinical trials applying MDSC inhibition to overcome resistance to ICIs. Recently identified novel markers for MDSC targeting in melanoma are also discussed.

Origin and phenotype of MDSCs

MDSCs are immature immunosuppressive myeloid cells or mature myeloid cells that acquired immunosuppressive functions (7, 14). These cells accumulate under chronic inflammatory conditions such as cancer, autoimmune diseases, and chronic infections (14). Under normal conditions, hematopoietic progenitor cells differentiate in the bone marrow into common myeloid progenitors that later give rise to immature myeloid cells, terminally differentiating into macrophages, dendritic cells (DCs), and granulocytes. Pathological conditions such as cancer lead to the dysregulated production of inflammatory signals and hematopoietic growth factors, which can initiate emergency myelopoiesis (15, 16). In this condition, the normal differentiation process of myeloid cells is impaired by the persistent production of growth factors and inflammation signals, resulting in the accumulation of immature myeloid cells (17). In contrast to normal counterparts, these immature myeloid cells, termed MDSCs, display weak phagocytic activity and antiinflammatory and immunosuppressive functions, as well as immature phenotypes and morphologies (18). Further, it has been demonstrated that mature myeloid cells could be converted into MDSCs upon treatment with tumor-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) (19–21). EVs are abundantly secreted by cancer cells and contain lipids, proteins, RNAs, and microRNAs (miRNAs) (22). It was demonstrated that miRNAs promoted MDSC generation, suppressive function, and expansion via targeting of transcription factors including suppressor of cytokine signaling (SOCS), CCAAT/enhancer binding protein (C/EBP), RUNX family transcription factor 1 (RUNX1), signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT), and phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) (23). EVs derived from human melanoma cells were shown to skew monocyte differentiation into immunosuppressive cells via a set of miRNAs (miRNA-146a, -155, -125b, -100, -125a, -146b, -99b, and let-7e) (21). It was also found that EVs secreted by mouse or human melanoma cells can convert normal monocytes into immunosuppressive MDSCs via programmed cell death protein ligand 1 (PD-L1) upregulation induced by HSP86/TLR4/NF-κB signaling (20).

MDSCs are categorized into two major subsets, polymorphonuclear (PMN-MDSCs) and monocytic (M-MDSCs), based on their phenotypic and morphological resemblance to granulocytes and monocytes, respectively. In addition, a small subset of human myeloid cells comprising more immature progenitors are defined as early-stage MDSCs (e-MDSCs) (13). In mice, MDSCs are characterized as Gr1+ (Ly6G+ and Ly6C+) CD11b+ cells. In mice, PMN-MDSCs are defined as CD11b+Ly6G+Ly6Clo and M-MDSCs as CD11b+Ly6G−Ly6Chi. In humans, PMN-MDSCs express CD15, CD33, and CD11b, no CD14, and low or no HLA-DR expression, whereas M-MDSCs express CD14, CD33, and CD11b with a lack of CD15 and low or no HLA-DR expression. In addition, e-MDSCs are defined as HLA-DR–CD33+CD14–CD15– cells (18). Human M-MDSCs could be distinguished from monocytes based on the level of HLA-DR expression. In contrast to neutrophils, which are purified on a higher density gradient, PMN-MDSCs are enriched in the low-density fraction after gradient centrifugation using the Ficoll gradient (18).

Additional markers including lectin-like oxidized low-density lipoprotein receptor-1 (LOX-1) have been used to distinguish human PMN-MDSCs from normal neutrophils (24). Moreover, CD84, a member of the signaling lymphocytic activation molecule (SLAM) family, and JAML, a member of the junctional adhesion molecule (JAM) family, have been demonstrated to be coexpressed on human MDSCs and to correlate with MDSC immunosuppressive activity in breast cancer (25). Despite the existence of MDSC markers and their phenotypic definition, the identification of MDSCs is still based on the assessment of their suppressive activity, since they share multiple genes with conventional neutrophils and monocytes (7).

Accumulation and recruitment of MDSCs

It has been reported that two partially overlapping signals are required for MDSC accumulation and activation (Figure 1) (7). Tumor cell–derived mediators such as stem cell factor (SCF), granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), monocyte colony-stimulating factor (M-CSF), and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) make up the first group of signals that stimulate myelopoiesis and promote MDSC expansion (26). These mediators stimulate STAT and Janus kinase (JAK) proteins. Transcriptional factors or regulators involved in the accumulation of MDSCs include STAT3, STAT4, C/EBP-β, Notch, interferon regulatory factor 8 (IRF8), etc. (27). The second group of signals includes inflammatory cytokines produced mainly by host cells in the TME, such as IL-6, IL-4, IL-1β, and prostaglandin E2 (PGE2). Other molecules, like Toll-like receptor (TLR) agonists and damage-associated molecular patterns, including high-mobility group box 1 (HMGB1), S100 calcium-binding proteins, tumor-derived heat shock proteins (HSPs), and complement component C5a, are reported to contribute to MDSC generation (14, 28). Long-term secretion of these mediators can promote the activation and immunosuppressive activity of MDSCs. Furthermore, NF-κB, STAT1, and STAT6 transcription factors are also involved in this process (6). Secretion of a high level of cytokines including TGF-β, IL-1β, IL-10, and TNF-α mediates the acquisition of MDSC immunosuppressive features (29). TNF-α was shown to induce the phosphorylation of STAT3, resulting in the differentiation of myeloid progenitor cells into MDSCs (29). Sinha et al. (30) demonstrated that STAT3 induced S100A8/9 proinflammatory proteins, which foster the accumulation of MDSCs. Moreover, inhibition of S100A8/9 has been shown in various mouse tumor models to restrain tumor growth by reducing MDSC accumulation (31–33).

MDSCs are recruited to the TME by chemokines derived from both tumor and stroma cells (Figure 1). It has been demonstrated that chemokines such as CXCL5, CXCL6, CXLC12, CXCL8, CXCL1, CCL2, CCL3, CCL4, and CCL5 play an important role in MDSC recruitment (34). However, these chemokines are also critical for the recruitment of conventional neutrophils and monocytes, indicating the problems associated with specific MDSC targeting (35). Additionally, TME-derived hypoxia is one of the crucial factors stimulating the recruitment of MDSCs (36–38). Hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α) was found to be involved in generating M2 macrophages from monocytes inside a tumor (39).

Several studies indicated that MDSC subsets and tumor entities could determine which chemokines support MDSC migration into the tumor site (40). CCR2 signaling was demonstrated to mediate M-MDSC recruitment, which promoted suppression of CD8+ T cell infiltration into the tumor site in melanoma patients (41). The CCR5 ligands CCL3, CCL4, and CCL5 were also reported to play roles in the migration of M-MDSCs (42). On the other hand, PMN-MDSCs are recruited primarily by CXC chemokines such as CXCL1, CXCL2, CXCL5, CXCL6, and CXCL12 produced by tumor cells (43, 44). PMN-MDSCs from melanoma-bearing mice were demonstrated to express CXCR2 (45), and CXCR2 deletion impaired PMN-MDSC accumulation, leading to tumor growth inhibition (45, 46).

Immunosuppressive functions

MDSCs use several mechanisms to suppress immune responses mediated by T, B, and natural killer (NK) cells, thus strongly accelerating tumor progression. The main mechanisms of T cell suppression are dealing with the expression of negative immune checkpoint molecules like PD-L1, depletion of amino acids required for T cell activation, production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and nitric oxide (NO), and secretion of TGF-β and IL-10 (Figure 1) (29). MDSCs were shown to reduce the level of several amino acids essential for T cell functions (proliferation and cytokine production), such as cysteine, tryptophan, and l-arginine (47). The upregulation of arginase 1 (ARG1) and inducible NO synthase (iNOS) leads to the depletion of l-arginine amounts in the TME in different cancer entities (48, 49). Another important mechanism involved in MDSC immunosuppressive capacity is the activation of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO), an enzyme that converts l-tryptophan into N-formyl kynurenine (50, 51). The deficiency of l-tryptophan results in T cell anergy (51, 52).

A strong production of NO via iNOS activation and ROS by MDSCs was found to promote T cell anergy by the downregulation of T cell receptor ζ chain expression and even induce T cell apoptosis (53–55). Accumulated NO levels were shown to upregulate the expression of cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2), leading to increased production of PGE2 (56). The latter molecule was reported to promote the upregulation of immunosuppressive markers, including ARG1, IDO, and IL-10, in in vitro–generated MDSCs (57, 58).

It has been demonstrated that MDSCs express a high level of PD-L1, which interacts with PD-1 on T cells, inducing their anergy (37). Importantly, tumor-infiltrating MDSCs display higher PD-L1 expression than circulating MDSCs (59). Although some studies demonstrated that PD-L1 expression is predominantly restricted to M- and e-MDSCs (13), other publications described the presence of PD-L1 also on PMN-MDSCs (45, 60). MDSCs can also induce the expansion of regulatory T cells (Tregs) through the secretion of TGF-β and IL-10 (61). Via the expression of the metalloprotease ADAM17, M-MDSCs are able to downregulate the expression of L-selectin (CD62L) on T cells, which impairs their extravasation and tissue infiltration capacity (62). Another mechanism used by MDSCs to suppress T cell function is the production of extracellular adenosine from ATP in the hypoxic TME via ectonucleotidases CD39 and CD73 (63, 64). Adenosine was found to impair the activation of T cells in cancer by inhibiting their proliferation and cytokine production (65).

Besides T cells, MDSCs can inhibit the function of other immune cells, such as NK cells, DCs, macrophages, and B cells. For instance, TGF-β produced by MDSCs was shown to promote the suppression of NK cell functions (66). Crosstalk between MDSCs and NK cells results in impaired NK cell cytotoxicity and induction of immune tolerance by reducing NKG2D expression and IFN-γ production (67). Moreover, PMN-MDSCs were reported to inhibit antigen cross-presentation by DCs in tumor-bearing mice (68). Furthermore, an accumulation of M-MDSCs in melanoma patients blocked DC maturation (6). MDSCs also hinder the function of B cells through the production of IL-7 and STAT5 signaling (69), and upregulate PD-L1 expression on B cells, thereby leading to the accumulation of regulatory B cells (70). Interaction between MDSCs and macrophages leads to the initiation of tumor-promoting immune response through upregulation of IL-10 production by MDSCs and downregulation of IL-12 secretion by macrophages (71).

Metabolic changes in MDSCs have been reported to be associated with the acquisition of their suppressive functions. It has been described that altered lipid metabolism in MDSCs plays a critical role in their differentiation and functions (72). In mice, polyunsaturated fatty acid–enriched diets were found to promote MDSC generation and to enhance MDSC suppressive activity (73). Al-Khami et al. (74) reported that tumor-infiltrating MDSCs increased fatty acid uptake and fatty acid oxidation to foster their immunosuppressive functions and found that intracellular accumulation of lipids in the TME enhanced the oxidative metabolism and activated immunosuppressive mechanisms of MDSCs in a mouse model of Lewis lung carcinoma. It has been recently reported that fatty acid transporter protein 2 (FATP2), responsible for the uptake of arachidonic acid and synthesis of PGE2, is involved in the acquisition of PMN-MDSC suppressive activity (75). Inhibition of FATP2 was reported to abrogate PMN-MDSC functions and potentiate the efficacy of cancer immunotherapy in tumor-bearing mice (75). It was also demonstrated that MDSCs exhibit resistance to ferroptosis, a programmed cell death induced by iron-dependent lipid peroxidation (76). In a mouse model of colon cancer, tumor-infiltrating MDSCs were reported to overexpress a key ceramidase, N-acylsphingosine amidohydrolase 2 (Asah2), which protects MDSCs from ferroptosis. Correspondingly, in this study, inhibition of Asah2 could reduce MDSC accumulation in colon tumors (77).

Furthermore, MDSCs can upregulate glycolytic pathways, which support their survival by preventing ROS-mediated apoptosis (78). M-MDSCs isolated from tumor tissue of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma displayed reduced cellular ATP content and failed to utilize glucose, which is mediated by the accumulation of methylglyoxal in MDSCs. By transferring methylglyoxal to T cells, MDSCs can suppress their function owing to the depletion of cytosolic amino acids such as l-arginine (79).

The TME is characterized by hypoxia, nutrient deprivation, acidic pH, and elevated levels of free radicals, which could stimulate the activation of ER stress sensors such as inositol-requiring enzyme-1 (IRE1), protein kinase RNA-like endoplasmic reticulum kinase (PERK), and activating transcription factor 6 (ATF6) that leads to the induction of ER stress in MDSCs (80). As a response to ER stress, the expression of C/EBP homologous protein (CHOP) is enhanced, resulting in the activation of proapoptotic genes. Enhanced CHOP expression in both human and mouse MDSCs contributed to their short lifespan and correlated with the ability of MDSCs to impair T cell responses (81).

In addition to their immunosuppressive function, MDSCs were shown to regulate tumor angiogenesis and vasculogenesis by producing high levels of matrix metalloproteinase 9 (MMP9) (82). Through STAT3 activation, MDSCs can also directly produce angiogenic factors like VEGF and basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF) (83).

MDSCs in melanoma

Melanoma originates from the malignant transformation of melanocytes that can be found in different anatomic sites, including skin, conjunctiva, mucosal surfaces, and uveal structures (1, 84). Malignant melanoma is considered to be the most aggressive and fatal form of skin cancer. It results predominantly from oncogenic drivers, leading to constitutive activation of the MAPK pathway, including mutations of BRAF (40%–50% of cases), NRAS (20%–30% of cases), and NF1 (10%–15% of cases) (85). Selective inhibitors of mutant BRAF (dabrafenib, encorafenib, or vemurafenib) are currently used in combination with MEK inhibitors (trametinib, binimetinib, or cobimetinib) for the treatment of metastatic melanoma (85). Compared with the earlier chemotherapeutic approaches, lower toxicity and increased overall survival have been achieved with BRAF inhibitor treatment (86). However, the treatment efficiency of MEK and BRAF inhibitors remains low since a significant number of patients acquire resistance (87). Studies reported that BRAF and MEK inhibitors could exert immunomodulatory effects (88). BRAF inhibition was reported to reduce the recruitment of MDSCs in the TME in melanoma-bearing mice (89). Furthermore, MEK inhibition was shown to prevent the polarization of monocytes into MDSCs and the infiltration of MDSCs into the TME in a mouse melanoma model (90). On the other hand, Steinberg et al. (91) reported that in mice with melanoma resistant to BRAF inhibitors, MDSC functions were restored after initial reduction, indicating the potential role of MDSCs in the acquisition of such resistance.

Melanoma has a high mutational burden and shows high immune infiltration, which makes it an ideal target for immunotherapy (92). Currently, approved immunotherapeutic regimens include nivolumab and pembrolizumab to target PD-1, ipilimumab to target CTLA-4, or a combination of antibodies against PD-1 and CTLA-4 (93). Administration of ICIs displayed initially a high response rate and improved clinical outcomes (94, 95). However, many patients develop various resistance mechanisms, which reduce the response rate to the treatment (4, 96). Resistance to ICIs primarily resulted in insufficient generation or dysfunction of antitumor effector T cells or inadequate formation of memory T cells (97). Since the TME was shown to determine the effectiveness of ICIs, tumor-infiltrating immune cells represent promising targets to improve the effect of ICIs (98). Melanoma cells produce various factors that induce the generation and enrichment of MDSCs, Tregs, cancer-associated fibroblasts, and tumor-associated macrophages (99, 100). Among these immunosuppressive cell populations, MDSCs are considered to play a major role in the immunosuppressive melanoma microenvironment (98, 99).

Chronic inflammation was reported to be associated with melanoma initiation and progression (101). Melanoma cells are able to produce various inflammatory mediators, such as GM-CSF, VEGF, TGF-β, TNF-α, IL-6, IL-1β, IL-10, and chemokines (CCL2, CCL5, CXCL1, CXCL2, CXCL8, CXCL10). They can also induce the production of cytokines, chemokines, and growth factors by fibroblasts or immune cells, which can further stimulate the chemokine production by tumor cells, thereby creating autocrine and paracrine loops important for tumor progression (102). Long-term secretion of such inflammatory mediators induced MDSC accumulation and activation as well as the conversion of normal myeloid cells (like monocytes) into immunosuppressive MDSCs (102, 103).

Studies with RET-transgenic mice, which are characterized by the spontaneous development of skin malignant melanoma, revealed a profound accumulation of several inflammatory factors in melanoma lesions associated with MDSC enrichment in the melanoma microenvironment (104). These MDSCs strongly expressed ARG1 and PD-L1, produced high amounts of NOS and ROS, and significantly inhibited T cell functions both in vitro and in vivo (104). Similar observations have been demonstrated in the peripheral blood of melanoma patients. Elevated numbers of M-MDSCs in advanced melanoma patients were found to be associated with a high level of inflammatory mediators such as IL-1β and IFN-γ, which promotes MDSC accumulation and activation (105, 106). Other reports also showed an association between high levels of peripheral M-MDSCs and PMN-MDSCs and the tumor burden in patients with malignant melanoma (107, 108).

Several lines of evidence have illustrated the role of miRNAs in the expansion and activation of MDSCs (23). Huber et al. (21) reported that elevated expression of a set of miRNAs was significantly correlated with shorter progression-free survival in patients undergoing treatment with ipilimumab and nivolumab. Moreover, cancer stem cells could recruit MDSCs to regulate immunosuppression in the TME. For instance, downregulation of miRNA-92 expression in CD133+ melanoma stem cells potentiated the accumulation of MDSCs in the tumor site by enhancing integrin-dependent activation of TGF-β in melanoma-bearing mice (109).

Targeting MDSCs in melanoma therapy

A number of preclinical and clinical studies have been performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MDSC inhibition either as a single treatment or in combination with other therapies to improve antitumor responses and overcome the resistance of cancer cells (110–115). Ongoing clinical trials targeting MDSCs in melanoma patients are listed in Table 1. Current treatment strategies can be classified into five groups: (a) depletion of MDSCs; (b) inhibition of their suppressive functions; (c) blocking of their expansion and recruitment to the tumor site; (d) promotion of MDSC differentiation into mature myeloid cells; and (e) inhibition of MDSC metabolism (Figure 2) (35, 116).

MDSC depletion.

Such chemotherapeutics as gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil, paclitaxel, and doxorubicin were demonstrated to significantly reduce MDSC frequencies (116). Thus, low-dose paclitaxel could decrease the accumulation and immunosuppressive activity of tumor-infiltrating MDSCs in melanoma-bearing mice (117) and melanoma patients (118), leading to the inhibition of tumor progression. Moreover, the anti-CD33 monoclonal antibody gemtuzumab ozogamicin has recently been reported to deplete MDSCs, restore T cell immunity, and improve the efficiency of immunotherapy of various tumors, including melanoma (119). Furthermore, the tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib, which blocks several tyrosine kinases localized on both MDSCs and tumor cells, was reported to reduce MDSC frequencies via blockade of Fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 (Flt3), c-kit (CD117), and VEGF receptor (VEGFR) in patients with renal cell carcinoma (120, 121). Additionally, the TNF-related apoptosis-induced ligand receptor 2 (TRAIL-R2) agonistic antibody DS-8273a was demonstrated to eliminate MDSCs without affecting mature myeloid cells and to diminish the progression of disease among a cohort of patients with advanced malignancies (96). A phase I trial also tested the efficacy and safety of DS-8273a in combination with nivolumab in unresectable stage III/IV melanoma patients (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02983006).

Inhibition of MDSC suppressive functions.

Disruption of COX-2/PGE2 pathway and phosphodiesterase-5 (PDE5) inhibitors such as sildenafil, vardenafil, and tadalafil has been employed to neutralize MDSC immunosuppressive capacities (35). Sildenafil was reported to reduce the expression of ARG1 and iNOS in MDSCs, and thereby inhibit their immunosuppressive functions (122). Furthermore, Meyer et al. (104) showed that sildenafil prolonged the survival of melanoma-bearing mice by reducing MDSC levels and activity, leading to restored CD8+ T cell infiltration and function in the TME. In an open-label trial with tadalafil, some metastatic melanoma patients resistant to ICI showed a response to the treatment that was associated with MDSC inhibition and accumulation of activated CD8+ T cells in metastatic lesions (123).

Blocking phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) was reported to reprogram MDSCs from an immunosuppressive to an immune-promoting phenotype (82). An ongoing phase I clinical trial with IPI-549, an inhibitor of PI3K, in combination with nivolumab is demonstrating improved clinical activity and safety in patients with stage III/IV melanoma who showed resistance to anti–PD-L1 therapy (NCT02637531).

Inhibiting IDO could be another strategy to block MDSC functions. Clinical trials in patients with advanced solid tumors using IDO inhibitors such as epacadostat (124), navoximod (NCT02048709), EOS200271 (125), and BMS-986205 (NCT02658890) in combination therapies with ICIs showed that the treatment was effective and well tolerated. However, in a phase III trial, the combination of epacadostat with pembrolizumab in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma was not successful (NCT02752074). A preclinical study using an IDO vaccine to target IDO+ immunosuppressive cells in the TME demonstrated a depletion of immunosuppressive myeloid populations and improvement in antitumor effects in both IDO-expressing and non-IDO-expressing tumors from melanoma-bearing mice (114). Moreover, a phase I/II clinical trial in metastatic melanoma patients including an immunomodulatory vaccine (IO102/IO103) against IDO and PD-L1 showed a high response rate and improved progression-free survival (112).

STAT3 was found to be a promising target to diminish MDSC immunosuppressive functions (126). Diverse approaches targeting STAT3 inhibition have been evaluated in preclinical models and clinical trials (127–129). Nevertheless, clinical implementation in advanced solid tumors has yielded limited efficacy or intolerable toxicities (130). We demonstrated previously that STAT3 inhibition by napabucasin reduced the immunosuppressive activity of MDSCs and prolonged the survival of melanoma-bearing mice (131). Moreover, STAT3 activation in circulating M-MDSCs from melanoma patients was found to be correlated with their poor progression-free survival, indicating the potential role of STAT3 as a predictive marker and a therapeutic target in melanoma (131).

The key cytokine IL-1β, produced by inflammasome in response to damage-associated or pathogen-associated molecular patterns, was reported to be enriched in melanoma patients (132). Tengesdal et al. (133) demonstrated that inhibition of tumor-derived NLR family pyrin domain containing 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome by dapansutrile (OLT1177) in combination with ICIs reduced MDSC-mediated T cell suppression and thereby decreased tumor progression in melanoma-bearing mice.

Blocking MDSC expansion and recruitment.

Growth factors such as SCF, GM-CSF, CSF, and VEGF are produced by tumor cells and could stimulate the expansion of MDSCs (134–136). Inhibiting MDSC development from the bone marrow progenitors by blocking SCF was reported to reduce MDSC expansion and tumor angiogenesis in a mouse model of colon cancer (137). Moreover, the blockade of GM-CSF/G-CSF signaling was reported to restrain the accumulation of MDSCs and reinvigorate antitumor immune responses (138). Furthermore, when combined with other therapies, CSF-1/CSF-1R blockade was also shown to inhibit MDSC expansion (139). A clinical trial with the CSF-1R inhibitor ARRY-382 in patients with advanced solid tumors including melanoma was terminated due to insufficient efficacy (NCT02880371). However, a phase I/II clinical trial to test the efficacy and safety of CSF-1R inhibitors (PD-0360324) in patients with melanoma is still ongoing (NCT02554812).

Blocking the interactions of chemokine receptors with their ligands to inhibit MDSC recruitment to the tumor site has been implicated as a therapeutic strategy. Anti-CXCR2 therapy was shown to reduce the accumulation of PMN-MDSCs in the TME, prolong survival, and decrease the occurrence of distant metastases in melanoma-bearing mice (45). Currently, SX-682, a CXCR1/2 inhibitor, is being tested in a phase I trial with pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic melanoma (NCT03161431).

Histone deacetylases (HDACs) and DNA methyltransferases can regulate antitumor immunity (140). HDAC inhibition has been shown to reduce MDSC recruitment to the tumor site, reinforce T cell activation, and thereby improve antitumor immune responses (141). The HDAC inhibitor entinostat applied in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma in combination with pembrolizumab was reported to promote durable antitumor responses (142). Moreover, Li et al. (143) reported that low-dose HDAC inhibitor trichostatin A in combination with anti–PD-L1 antibodies potentiated antitumor effects of immunotherapies and prolonged the survival of melanoma-bearing mice.

A number of reports demonstrated that MDSCs contribute to tumor growth by stimulating angiogenesis (83, 144, 145). In particular, MDSCs increase the proliferation and vasculogenic mimicry formation of melanoma cells (146). It has been demonstrated that the chemotherapeutic drug doxycycline remarkably reduced the ability of MDSCs to stimulate mimicry formation in melanoma cells, resulting in a strong antitumor effect when applied in combination with anti–PD-1 antibodies in melanoma-bearing mice (146). Moreover, anti-VEGF/VEGFR agents tested in clinical trials could reduce the recruitment of MDSCs and inhibit their angiogenesis-promoting effects in patients with metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and colorectal cancer (147, 148). Additionally, a receptor for the proangiogenic factor angiopoietin 2, TIE-2, was reported to be expressed on circulating M-MDSCs from melanoma patients (149). TIE-2+ M-MDSCs overexpressed PD-L1, CD73, IL-10, and TGF-β and displayed high immunosuppressive activity against melanoma-specific T cells. The authors suggested that NGPT2/TIE-2 signaling represents a tumor escape mechanism and that the combination of TIE-2 inhibitors and ICIs possesses therapeutic potential in melanoma (149).

Sun et al. (150) reported that the level of CXCL10 is greatly enhanced under tumor conditions and increased CXCL10 induces the accumulation of peripheral M-MDSCs, ultimately leading to tumor growth and metastasis in melanoma-bearing mice. This may indicate the importance of potential therapies targeting CXCL10 in the TME.

Artemisinin, an antimalarial drug, has been described as a promising therapeutic agent for cancer treatment (151). A preclinical study demonstrated that artemisinin therapy inhibited the accumulation and immunosuppressive activity of MDSCs, promoted antitumor T cell proliferation, and enhanced the efficacy of anti–PD-L1 therapy in melanoma-bearing mice (152).

Promotion of MDSC differentiation.

All-trans retinoic acid (ATRA) was demonstrated to stimulate the maturation of myeloid cells into fully differentiated and less immunosuppressive variants (153). ATRA-induced differentiation of MDSCs into mature myeloid cells has been implicated in many preclinical and clinical studies (153, 154). In particular, a phase I/II clinical trial with a combination of ATRA and pembrolizumab revealed a favorable tolerability and high response rate in patients with stage IV melanoma (NCT02403778) (115).

Inhibition of MDSC metabolism.

Another possibility to inhibit MDSC-mediated immunosuppression is to interrupt MDSC metabolism. In several tumor mouse models, the FATP2 inhibitor lipofermata alone or in combination with ICI blocked the activity of PMN-MDSCs and delayed tumor growth (75). Etomoxir is a small-molecule inhibitor of fatty acid oxidation (FAO), blocking carnitine palmitoyltransferase 1a (CPT1a), an important transporter critical for the oxidation of long-chain fatty acids in mitochondria (155). FAO inhibition by etomoxir was reported to decrease tumor growth in different mouse models by limiting MDSC fatty acid metabolism (156). Several studies demonstrated the association between the CD39/CD73/A2AR signaling pathway and poor cancer prognosis (64, 157, 158). An anti-CD73 antibody, oleclumab, is being tested together with anti–PD-L1 antibody (durvalumab) in various phase II trials in patients with NSCLC (NCT03822351, NCT03334617, NCT03794544). Moreover, clinical studies have also been performed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the dual inhibition of adenosine receptors A2AR and A2BR (NCT05024097) or coinhibition of A2AR and CD73 (159) as a potential strategy to inhibit adenosine-mediated immunosuppression.

Itaconate, a tricarboxylic acid cycle–derived metabolite produced after the activation of immune response gene 1 (IRG1) by inflammatory stimuli, was found to be secreted by MDSCs (113, 160). Zhao et al. (160) demonstrated that itaconate derived from MDSCs suppressed CD8+ T cell proliferation and function. Furthermore, a loss of IRG1 diminished tumor growth and potentiated the efficacy of anti–PD-1 immunotherapy in the murine melanoma model, suggesting that IRG1 could be targeted to improve response to ICIs.

Novel markers for MDSC targeting in melanoma

Among potential novel surface markers for MDSC identification, another lipid transport receptor, CD36, was found to be upregulated in tumor-infiltrating PMN-MDSCs with increased immunosuppressive functions in patients with renal cell carcinoma and colon adenocarcinoma (74). The deletion of CD36 or FAO inhibition resulted in decreased suppressive functions of MDSCs and increased efficacy of immunotherapy associated with delayed tumor growth in a mouse model of Lewis lung carcinoma (74).

General control nonderepressible 2 (GCN2), a serine-threonine kinase controlling transcription and translation in response to nutrient availability (161), was found to be a critical driver for the generation of tumor-associated macrophages and MDSCs in tumor-bearing hosts (162). Depletion of GCN2 decreased MDSC immunosuppressive functions and reduced IFN-γ expression in intratumoral CD8+ T cells in a mouse melanoma model (162). Increased GCN2 activity was also found to be correlated with a decreased overall survival in melanoma patients (162).

Another potential MDSC marker, immunoglobulin-like transcript 3 (ILT3), was found to play an important role in the acquisition of their immunosuppressive activity (163). MDSCs generated via melanoma cell lines were found to express high levels of ILT3, and ILT3 inhibition reduced the capacity of MDSCs to suppress T cells (164). Moreover, the ILT3hi fraction of PMN-MDSCs were shown to be correlated with poor outcome in NSCLC patients (165), indicating that blocking of ILT3 may increase the antitumor responses by inhibiting MDSC functions.

Conclusion and future perspectives

ICI therapies have led to a significant improvement in the treatment of metastatic melanoma over the past decade. However, this improvement is not sufficient, and resistance develops over time due to a profound immunosuppression in the TME. MDSCs are strongly enriched in the melanoma microenvironment and employ several mechanisms to inhibit antitumor effector functions of T and NK cells (103). To enhance cancer immunotherapy, it is critically important to reprogram the unresponsive T cells in the TME to reinvigorate their antitumor functions (2). In this context, we have summarized the current understanding of the mechanisms by which MDSCs could support the immunosuppressive melanoma microenvironment, as well as the current strategies that aim at MDSC inhibition to enhance antitumor immune responses and overcome the resistance to immunotherapy. A thorough understanding of the complex interactions between MDSCs and tumor cells as well as with other immune cells and the identification of novel surface markers that can distinguish MDSCs from normal myeloid cells are needed to develop more effective melanoma immunotherapies. However, some challenges exist in MDSC targeting. Blocking one single mechanism might not be sufficient to inhibit MDSC functions, since these cells are able to apply various suppression mechanisms simultaneously. Therefore, new studies are needed to find factors that could target more than one mechanism of suppression. Moreover, since MDSCs share multiple phenotypic similarities with their normal counterparts, many MDSC-targeting compounds suffer from a lack of specificity. Refinement of phenotypic definition is needed to modulate MDSCs without causing an impact on conventional monocytes and neutrophils. The use of high-dimensional single-cell technologies could be crucial for reducing the ambiguity by creating a precise definition of MDSCs, enabling functional manipulation, and ultimately incorporating MDSC targeting into clinical practice.

This work was supported by the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD; to FGOK), the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF)–SERPENTINE project in the ERA PerMed network (01KU2017 to VU), and the German Research Foundation (DFG), project 259332240/RTG 2099 (to JU and VU).

Version 1 07/03/2023

Electronic publication

Figure 1 MDSC accumulation, recruitment, and functions in the TME.

Inflammatory mediators released by host cells lead to the dysregulation of normal myelopoiesis and to the accumulation of MDSCs in the bone marrow. MDSCs expand and migrate to the TME through the interaction between CCR and CXCR and their corresponding chemokine ligands. In the TME, MDSCs are activated, and promote immunosuppression and tumor growth via various mechanisms. These mechanisms involve inhibiting the functions of T cells, NK cells, and DCs, promoting the differentiation of M2 macrophages, Tregs, and Bregs, and inducing angiogenesis and metastasis. Breg, regulatory B cell; CMP, common myeloid progenitor; HSC, hematopoietic stem cell.

Figure 2 Potential therapeutic approaches to target MDSCs.

The main strategies to target MDSCs include MDSC depletion (A); inhibition of MDSC suppressive functions (B); blocking of MDSC expansion and recruitment (C); promotion of MDSC differentiation (D); and inhibition of MDSC metabolism (E). Relevant MDSC mechanisms are illustrated in each panel, and examples for each type of therapeutic approach are listed. AA, arachidonic acid; CMP, common myeloid progenitor; CPT1, carnitine palmitoyltransferase 1; FAO, fatty acid oxidation; FFAs, free fatty acids; GO, gemtuzumab ozogamicin; HSC, hematopoietic stem cell; TKIs, tyrosine kinase inhibitors; TSA, trichostatin A.

Table 1 Clinical trials targeting MDSCs in melanoma

Conflict of interest: The authors have declared that no conflict of interest exists.

Copyright: © 2023, Ozbay Kurt et al. This is an open access article published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Reference information: J Clin Invest. 2023;133(13):e170762. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI170762.
==== Refs
1 Schadendorf D et al Melanoma Lancet 2018 392 10151 971 984 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31559-9 30238891
2 Waldman AD et al A guide to cancer immunotherapy: from T cell basic science to clinical practice Nat Rev Immunol 2020 20 11 651 668 10.1038/s41577-020-0306-5 32433532
3 Wang DR et al Therapeutic targets and biomarkers of tumor immunotherapy: response versus non-response Signal Transduct Target Ther 2022 7 1 331 10.1038/s41392-022-01136-2 36123348
4 Huang AC Zappasodi R A decade of checkpoint blockade immunotherapy in melanoma: understanding the molecular basis for immune sensitivity and resistance Nat Immunol 2022 23 5 660 670 10.1038/s41590-022-01141-1 35241833
5 Parker KH et al Myeloid-derived suppressor cells: critical cells driving immune suppression in the tumor microenvironment Adv Cancer Res 2015 128 95 139 10.1016/bs.acr.2015.04.002 26216631
6 Umansky V et al The role of myeloid-derived suppressor Cells (MDSC) in cancer progression Vaccines (Basel) 2016 4 4 36 10.3390/vaccines4040036 27827871
7 Veglia F et al Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in the era of increasing myeloid cell diversity Nat Rev Immunol 2021 21 8 485 498 10.1038/s41577-020-00490-y 33526920
8 Arihara F et al Increase in CD14+HLA-DR–/low myeloid-derived suppressor cells in hepatocellular carcinoma patients and its impact on prognosis Cancer Immunol Immunother 2013 62 8 1421 1430 10.1007/s00262-013-1447-1 23764929
9 Huang A et al Increased CD14(+)HLA-DR(-/low) myeloid-derived suppressor cells correlate with extrathoracic metastasis and poor response to chemotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer patients Cancer Immunol Immunother 2013 62 9 1439 1451 10.1007/s00262-013-1450-6 23760662
10 Davis RJ et al Anti-PD-L1 efficacy can be enhanced by inhibition of myeloid-derived suppressor cells with a selective inhibitor of PI3Kδ/γ Cancer Res 2017 77 10 2607 2619 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-2534 28364000
11 Meyer C et al Frequencies of circulating MDSC correlate with clinical outcome of melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab Cancer Immunol Immunother 2014 63 3 247 257 10.1007/s00262-013-1508-5 24357148
12 Tada K et al Pretreatment immune status correlates with progression-free survival in chemotherapy-treated metastatic colorectal cancer patients Cancer Immunol Res 2016 4 7 592 599 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-15-0298 27197061
13 Cassetta L et al Differential expansion of circulating human MDSC subsets in patients with cancer, infection and inflammation J Immunother Cancer 2020 8 2 e001223 10.1136/jitc-2020-001223 32907925
14 Gabrilovich DI Myeloid-derived suppressor cells Cancer Immunol Res 2017 5 1 3 8 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-16-0297 28052991
15 Weiskopf K et al Myeloid cell origins, differentiation, and clinical implications Microbiol Spectr 2016 4 5 10.1128/microbiolspec.MCHD-0031-2016 27763252
16 Marvel D Gabrilovich DI Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in the tumor microenvironment: expect the unexpected J Clin Invest 2015 125 9 3356 3364 10.1172/JCI80005 26168215
17 Nagaraj S Gabrilovich DI Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in human cancer Cancer J 2010 16 4 348 353 10.1097/PPO.0b013e3181eb3358 20693846
18 Bronte V et al Recommendations for myeloid-derived suppressor cell nomenclature and characterization standards Nat Commun 2016 7 12150 10.1038/ncomms12150 27381735
19 Valenti R et al Human tumor-released microvesicles promote the differentiation of myeloid cells with transforming growth factor-beta-mediated suppressive activity on T lymphocytes Cancer Res 2006 66 18 9290 9298 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-1819 16982774
20 Fleming V et al Melanoma extracellular vesicles generate immunosuppressive myeloid cells by upregulating PD-L1 via TLR4 signaling Cancer Res 2019 79 18 4715 4728 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-19-0053 31337655
21 Huber V et al Tumor-derived microRNAs induce myeloid suppressor cells and predict immunotherapy resistance in melanoma J Clin Invest 2018 128 12 5505 5516 10.1172/JCI98060 30260323
22 Garcia-Martin R et al MicroRNA sequence codes for small extracellular vesicle release and cellular retention Nature 2022 601 7893 446 451 10.1038/s41586-021-04234-3 34937935
23 Daveri E et al MicroRNAs shape myeloid cell-mediated resistance to cancer immunotherapy Front Immunol 2020 11 1214 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01214 32793185
24 Condamine T et al Lectin-type oxidized LDL receptor-1 distinguishes population of human polymorphonuclear myeloid-derived suppressor cells in cancer patients Sci Immunol 2016 1 2 aaf8943 10.1126/sciimmunol.aaf8943 28417112
25 Alshetaiwi H et al Defining the emergence of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in breast cancer using single-cell transcriptomics Sci Immunol 2020 5 44 eaay6017 10.1126/sciimmunol.aay6017 32086381
26 Gabrilovich DI Nagaraj S Myeloid-derived suppressor cells as regulators of the immune system Nat Rev Immunol 2009 9 3 162 174 10.1038/nri2506 19197294
27 Condamine T et al Transcriptional regulation of myeloid-derived suppressor cells J Leukoc Biol 2015 98 6 913 922 10.1189/jlb.4RI0515-204R 26337512
28 Condamine T Gabrilovich DI Molecular mechanisms regulating myeloid-derived suppressor cell differentiation and function Trends Immunol 2011 32 1 19 25 10.1016/j.it.2010.10.002 21067974
29 Groth C et al Immunosuppression mediated by myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) during tumour progression Br J Cancer 2019 120 1 16 25 10.1038/s41416-018-0333-1 30413826
30 Sinha P et al Proinflammatory S100 proteins regulate the accumulation of myeloid-derived suppressor cells J Immunol 2008 181 7 4666 4675 10.4049/jimmunol.181.7.4666 18802069
31 Cheng P et al Inhibition of dendritic cell differentiation and accumulation of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in cancer is regulated by S100A9 protein J Exp Med 2008 205 10 2235 2249 10.1084/jem.20080132 18809714
32 Kinoshita R et al Newly developed anti-S100A8/A9 monoclonal antibody efficiently prevents lung tropic cancer metastasis Int J Cancer 2019 145 2 569 575 10.1002/ijc.31982 30414170
33 Qin H et al Generation of a new therapeutic peptide that depletes myeloid-derived suppressor cells in tumor-bearing mice Nat Med 2014 20 6 676 681 10.1038/nm.3560 24859530
34 Kumar V et al The nature of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in the tumor microenvironment Trends Immunol 2016 37 3 208 220 10.1016/j.it.2016.01.004 26858199
35 Li K et al Myeloid-derived suppressor cells as immunosuppressive regulators and therapeutic targets in cancer Signal Transduct Target Ther 2021 6 1 362 10.1038/s41392-021-00670-9 34620838
36 Chiu DK et al Hypoxia induces myeloid-derived suppressor cell recruitment to hepatocellular carcinoma through chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 26 Hepatology 2016 64 3 797 813 10.1002/hep.28655 27228567
37 Noman MZ et al PD-L1 is a novel direct target of HIF-1α, and its blockade under hypoxia enhanced MDSC-mediated T cell activation J Exp Med 2014 211 5 781 790 10.1084/jem.20131916 24778419
38 Chiu DK et al Hypoxia inducible factor HIF-1 promotes myeloid-derived suppressor cells accumulation through ENTPD2/CD39L1 in hepatocellular carcinoma Nat Commun 2017 8 1 517 10.1038/s41467-017-00530-7 28894087
39 Kumar V Gabrilovich DI Hypoxia-inducible factors in regulation of immune responses in tumour microenvironment Immunology 2014 143 4 512 519 10.1111/imm.12380 25196648
40 De Cicco P et al The new era of cancer immunotherapy: targeting myeloid-derived suppressor cells to overcome immune evasion Front Immunol 2020 11 1680 10.3389/fimmu.2020.01680 32849585
41 Lesokhin AM et al Monocytic CCR2(+) myeloid-derived suppressor cells promote immune escape by limiting activated CD8 T-cell infiltration into the tumor microenvironment Cancer Res 2012 72 4 876 886 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-1792 22174368
42 Blattner C et al CCR5+ myeloid-derived suppressor cells are enriched and activated in melanoma lesions Cancer Res 2018 78 1 157 167 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-17-0348 29089297
43 Wang N et al Neutrophils infiltration in the tongue squamous cell carcinoma and its correlation with CEACAM1 expression on tumor cells PLoS One 2014 9 2 e89991 10.1371/journal.pone.0089991 24587171
44 Kowalczuk O et al CXCL5 as a potential novel prognostic factor in early stage non-small cell lung cancer: results of a study of expression levels of 23 genes Tumour Biol 2014 35 5 4619 4628 10.1007/s13277-014-1605-x 24500664
45 Groth C et al Blocking migration of polymorphonuclear myeloid-derived suppressor cells inhibits mouse melanoma progression Cancers (Basel) 2021 13 4 726 10.3390/cancers13040726 33578808
46 Yang J et al Targeted deletion of CXCR2 in myeloid cells alters the tumor immune environment to improve antitumor immunity Cancer Immunol Res 2021 9 2 200 213 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-20-0312 33177110
47 Cheng JN et al Myeloid-derived suppressor cells: a multifaceted accomplice in tumor progression Front Cell Dev Biol 2021 9 740827 10.3389/fcell.2021.740827 35004667
48 Nagaraj S et al Altered recognition of antigen is a mechanism of CD8+ T cell tolerance in cancer Nat Med 2007 13 7 828 835 10.1038/nm1609 17603493
49 Rodriguez PC et al Arginase I production in the tumor microenvironment by mature myeloid cells inhibits T-cell receptor expression and antigen-specific T-cell responses Cancer Res 2004 64 16 5839 5849 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-0465 15313928
50 Yu J et al Myeloid-derived suppressor cells suppress antitumor immune responses through IDO expression and correlate with lymph node metastasis in patients with breast cancer J Immunol 2013 190 7 3783 3797 10.4049/jimmunol.1201449 23440412
51 Holmgaard RB et al Tumor-expressed IDO recruits and activates MDSCs in a Treg-dependent manner Cell Rep 2015 13 2 412 424 10.1016/j.celrep.2015.08.077 26411680
52 Munn DH Blocking IDO activity to enhance anti-tumor immunity Front Biosci (Elite Ed) 2012 4 2 734 745 22201909
53 Ostrand-Rosenberg S Sinha P Myeloid-derived suppressor cells: linking inflammation and cancer J Immunol 2009 182 8 4499 4506 10.4049/jimmunol.0802740 19342621
54 Umansky V Schirrmacher V Nitric oxide-induced apoptosis in tumor cells Adv Cancer Res 2001 82 107 131 10.1016/S0065-230X(01)82004-2 11447761
55 Corzo CA et al Mechanism regulating reactive oxygen species in tumor-induced myeloid-derived suppressor cells J Immunol 2009 182 9 5693 5701 10.4049/jimmunol.0900092 19380816
56 Obermajer N Kalinski P Key role of the positive feedback between PGE(2) and COX2 in the biology of myeloid-derived suppressor cells Oncoimmunology 2012 1 5 762 764 10.4161/onci.19681 22934275
57 Obermajer N Kalinski P Generation of myeloid-derived suppressor cells using prostaglandin E2 Transplant Res 2012 1 1 15 10.1186/2047-1440-1-15 23369567
58 Lu C et al The expression profiles and regulation of PD-L1 in tumor-induced myeloid-derived suppressor cells Oncoimmunology 2016 5 12 e1247135 10.1080/2162402X.2016.1247135 28123883
59 Ostrand-Rosenberg S et al The programmed death-1 immune-suppressive pathway: barrier to antitumor immunity J Immunol 2014 193 8 3835 3841 10.4049/jimmunol.1401572 25281753
60 Patel A et al Multimodal intralesional therapy for reshaping the myeloid compartment of tumors resistant to anti-PD-L1 therapy via IRF8 expression J Immunol 2021 207 5 1298 1309 10.4049/jimmunol.2100281 34362833
61 Siret C et al Deciphering the crosstalk between myeloid-derived suppressor cells and regulatory T cells in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma Front Immunol 2019 10 3070 32038621
62 Hanson EM et al Myeloid-derived suppressor cells down-regulate L-selectin expression on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells J Immunol 2009 183 2 937 944 10.4049/jimmunol.0804253 19553533
63 Li J et al CD39/CD73 upregulation on myeloid-derived suppressor cells via TGF-β-mTOR-HIF-1 signaling in patients with non-small cell lung cancer Oncoimmunology 2017 6 6 e1320011 10.1080/2162402X.2017.1320011 28680754
64 Hatfield SM Sitkovsky M A2A adenosine receptor antagonists to weaken the hypoxia-HIF-1alpha driven immunosuppression and improve immunotherapies of cancer Curr Opin Pharmacol 2016 29 90 96 10.1016/j.coph.2016.06.009 27429212
65 Shevchenko I et al Enhanced expression of CD39 and CD73 on T cells in the regulation of anti-tumor immune responses Oncoimmunology 2020 9 1 1744946 10.1080/2162402X.2020.1744946 33457090
66 Mao Y et al Inhibition of tumor-derived prostaglandin-E2 blocks the induction of myeloid-derived suppressor cells and recovers natural killer cell activity Clin Cancer Res 2014 20 15 4096 4106 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-0635 24907113
67 Tumino N et al Interaction between MDSC and NK cells in solid and hematological malignancies: impact on HSCT Front Immunol 2021 12 638841 10.3389/fimmu.2021.638841 33679798
68 Ugolini A et al Polymorphonuclear myeloid-derived suppressor cells limit antigen cross-presentation by dendritic cells in cancer JCI Insight 2020 5 15 e138581 10.1172/jci.insight.138581 32584791
69 Wang Y et al Myeloid-derived suppressor cells impair B cell responses in lung cancer through IL-7 and STAT5 J Immunol 2018 201 1 278 295 10.4049/jimmunol.1701069 29752311
70 Liu M et al Myeloid-derived suppressor cells regulate the immunosuppressive functions of PD-1(-)PD-L1(+) Bregs through PD-L1/PI3K/AKT/NF-kappaB axis in breast cancer Cell Death Dis 2021 12 5 465 10.1038/s41419-021-03745-1 33967272
71 Sinha P et al Cross-talk between myeloid-derived suppressor cells and macrophages subverts tumor immunity toward a type 2 response J Immunol 2007 179 2 977 983 10.4049/jimmunol.179.2.977 17617589
72 Siddiqui S Glauben R Fatty acid metabolism in myeloid-derived suppressor cells and tumor-associated macrophages: key factor in cancer immune evasion Cancers (Basel) 2022 14 1 250 10.3390/cancers14010250 35008414
73 Yan D et al Polyunsaturated fatty acids promote the expansion of myeloid-derived suppressor cells by activating the JAK/STAT3 pathway Eur J Immunol 2013 43 11 2943 2955 10.1002/eji.201343472 23897117
74 Al-Khami AA et al Exogenous lipid uptake induces metabolic and functional reprogramming of tumor-associated myeloid-derived suppressor cells Oncoimmunology 2017 6 10 e1344804 10.1080/2162402X.2017.1344804 29123954
75 Veglia F et al Fatty acid transport protein 2 reprograms neutrophils in cancer Nature 2019 569 7754 73 78 10.1038/s41586-019-1118-2 30996346
76 Dang Q et al Ferroptosis: a double-edged sword mediating immune tolerance of cancer Cell Death Dis 2022 13 11 925 10.1038/s41419-022-05384-6 36335094
77 Zhu H et al Asah2 represses the p53-hmox1 axis to protect myeloid-derived suppressor cells from ferroptosis J Immunol 2021 206 6 1395 1404 10.4049/jimmunol.2000500 33547170
78 Jian SL et al Glycolysis regulates the expansion of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in tumor-bearing hosts through prevention of ROS-mediated apoptosis Cell Death Dis 2017 8 5 e2779 10.1038/cddis.2017.192 28492541
79 Baumann T et al Regulatory myeloid cells paralyze T cells through cell-cell transfer of the metabolite methylglyoxal Nat Immunol 2020 21 5 555 566 10.1038/s41590-020-0666-9 32327756
80 Lou X et al Endoplasmic reticulum stress mediates the myeloid-derived immune suppression associated with cancer and infectious disease J Transl Med 2023 21 1 1 10.1186/s12967-022-03835-4 36593497
81 Thevenot PT et al The stress-response sensor chop regulates the function and accumulation of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in tumors Immunity 2014 41 3 389 401 10.1016/j.immuni.2014.08.015 25238096
82 Li X et al Targeting myeloid-derived suppressor cells to enhance the antitumor efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade therapy Front Immunol 2021 12 754196 10.3389/fimmu.2021.754196 35003065
83 Kujawski M et al Stat3 mediates myeloid cell-dependent tumor angiogenesis in mice J Clin Invest 2008 118 10 3367 3377 10.1172/JCI35213 18776941
84 Whiteman DC et al The melanomas: a synthesis of epidemiological, clinical, histopathological, genetic, and biological aspects, supporting distinct subtypes, causal pathways, and cells of origin Pigment Cell Melanoma Res 2011 24 5 879 897 10.1111/j.1755-148X.2011.00880.x 21707960
85 Guo W et al Signal pathways of melanoma and targeted therapy Signal Transduct Target Ther 2021 6 1 424 10.1038/s41392-021-00827-6 34924562
86 Robert C et al Improved overall survival in melanoma with combined dabrafenib and trametinib N Engl J Med 2015 372 1 30 39 10.1056/NEJMoa1412690 25399551
87 Tanda ET et al Current state of target treatment in braf mutated melanoma Front Mol Biosci 2020 7 154 10.3389/fmolb.2020.00154 32760738
88 Jung T et al Immunomodulatory properties of BRAF and MEK inhibitors used for melanoma therapy-paradoxical ERK activation and beyond Int J Mol Sci 2021 22 18 9890 10.3390/ijms22189890 34576054
89 Ho PC et al Immune-based antitumor effects of BRAF inhibitors rely on signaling by CD40L and IFNγ Cancer Res 2014 74 12 3205 3217 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-3461 24736544
90 Baumann D et al Proimmunogenic impact of MEK inhibition synergizes with agonist anti-CD40 immunostimulatory antibodies in tumor therapy Nat Commun 2020 11 1 2176 10.1038/s41467-020-15979-2 32358491
91 Steinberg SM et al Myeloid cells that impair immunotherapy are restored in melanomas with acquired resistance to BRAF inhibitors Cancer Res 2017 77 7 1599 1610 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-1755 28202513
92 Marzagalli M et al Unraveling the crosstalk between melanoma and immune cells in the tumor microenvironment Semin Cancer Biol 2019 59 236 250 10.1016/j.semcancer.2019.08.002 31404607
93 Eggermont AMM et al Combination immunotherapy development in melanoma Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book 2018 38 197 207 30231333
94 Hamid O et al Five-year survival outcomes for patients with advanced melanoma treated with pembrolizumab in KEYNOTE-001 Ann Oncol 2019 30 4 582 588 10.1093/annonc/mdz011 30715153
95 Larkin J et al Five-year survival with combined nivolumab and ipilimumab in advanced melanoma N Engl J Med 2019 381 16 1535 1546 10.1056/NEJMoa1910836 31562797
96 Johnson DB et al Immune-checkpoint inhibitors: long-term implications of toxicity Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2022 19 4 254 267 10.1038/s41571-022-00600-w 35082367
97 Jenkins RW et al Mechanisms of resistance to immune checkpoint inhibitors Br J Cancer 2018 118 1 9 16 10.1038/bjc.2017.434 29319049
98 Petrova V et al Modern aspects of immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors in melanoma Int J Mol Sci 2020 21 7 2367 10.3390/ijms21072367 32235439
99 Navarini-Meury AA Conrad C Melanoma and innate immunity—active inflammation or just erroneous attraction? Melanoma as the source of leukocyte-attracting chemokines Semin Cancer Biol 2009 19 2 84 91 10.1016/j.semcancer.2008.10.012 19038342
100 Falcone I et al Tumor microenvironment: implications in melanoma resistance to targeted therapy and immunotherapy Cancers (Basel) 2020 12 10 2870 10.3390/cancers12102870 33036192
101 Kanterman J et al New insights into chronic inflammation-induced immunosuppression Semin Cancer Biol 2012 22 4 307 318 10.1016/j.semcancer.2012.02.008 22387003
102 Zhao H et al Inflammation and tumor progression: signaling pathways and targeted intervention Signal Transduct Target Ther 2021 6 1 263 10.1038/s41392-021-00658-5 34248142
103 Umansky V et al Myeloid-derived suppressor cells in malignant melanoma J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 2014 12 11 1021 1027 10.1111/ddg.12411 25263083
104 Meyer C et al Chronic inflammation promotes myeloid-derived suppressor cell activation blocking antitumor immunity in transgenic mouse melanoma model Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2011 108 41 17111 17116 10.1073/pnas.1108121108 21969559
105 Jiang H et al Elevated chronic inflammatory factors and myeloid-derived suppressor cells indicate poor prognosis in advanced melanoma patients Int J Cancer 2015 136 10 2352 2360 10.1002/ijc.29297 25353097
106 Umansky V et al Predictive immune markers in advanced melanoma patients treated with ipilimumab Oncoimmunology 2016 5 6 e1158901 10.1080/2162402X.2016.1158901 27471626
107 Weide B et al Myeloid-derived suppressor cells predict survival of patients with advanced melanoma: comparison with regulatory T cells and NY-ESO-1- or melan-A-specific T cells Clin Cancer Res 2014 20 6 1601 1609 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-2508 24323899
108 Schilling B et al Vemurafenib reverses immunosuppression by myeloid derived suppressor cells Int J Cancer 2013 133 7 1653 1663 10.1002/ijc.28168 23526263
109 Shidal C et al MicroRNA-92 expression in CD133+ melanoma stem cells regulates immunosuppression in the tumor microenvironment via integrin-dependent activation of TGFβ Cancer Res 2019 79 14 3622 3635 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-2659 31015227
110 Cheng P et al Immunodepletion of MDSC by AMV564, a novel bivalent, bispecific CD33/CD3 T cell engager, ex vivo in MDS and melanoma Mol Ther 2022 30 6 2315 2326 10.1016/j.ymthe.2022.02.005 35150889
111 Gordy JT et al IFNα and 5-aza-2′-deoxycytidine combined with a dendritic-cell targeting DNA vaccine alter tumor immune cell infiltration in the B16F10 melanoma model Front Immunol 2022 13 1074644 36741387
112 Kjeldsen JW et al A phase 1/2 trial of an immune-modulatory vaccine against IDO/PD-L1 in combination with nivolumab in metastatic melanoma Nat Med 2021 27 12 2212 2223 10.1038/s41591-021-01544-x 34887574
113 Mills EL et al Itaconate is an anti-inflammatory metabolite that activates Nrf2 via alkylation of KEAP1 Nature 2018 556 7699 113 117 10.1038/nature25986 29590092
114 Nandre R et al IDO vaccine ablates immune-suppressive myeloid populations and enhances antitumor effects independent of tumor cell IDO status Cancer Immunol Res 2022 10 5 571 580 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-21-0457 35290437
115 Tobin RP et al Targeting MDSC differentiation using ATRA: a Phase I/II clinical trial combining pembrolizumab and all-trans retinoic acid for metastatic melanoma Clin Cancer Res 2022 7 1209 1219 36378549
116 Fleming V et al Targeting myeloid-derived suppressor cells to bypass tumor-induced immunosuppression Front Immunol 2018 9 398 10.3389/fimmu.2018.00398 29552012
117 Sevko A et al Antitumor effect of paclitaxel is mediated by inhibition of myeloid-derived suppressor cells and chronic inflammation in the spontaneous melanoma model J Immunol 2013 190 5 2464 2471 10.4049/jimmunol.1202781 23359505
118 Gebhardt C et al Potential therapeutic effect of low-dose paclitaxel in melanoma patients resistant to immune checkpoint blockade: a pilot study Cell Immunol 2021 360 104274 10.1016/j.cellimm.2020.104274 33383383
119 Fultang L et al MDSC targeting with Gemtuzumab ozogamicin restores T cell immunity and immunotherapy against cancers EBioMedicine 2019 47 235 246 10.1016/j.ebiom.2019.08.025 31462392
120 Ko JS et al Sunitinib mediates reversal of myeloid-derived suppressor cell accumulation in renal cell carcinoma patients Clin Cancer Res 2009 15 6 2148 2157 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-1332 19276286
121 Kodera Y et al Sunitinib inhibits lymphatic endothelial cell functions and lymph node metastasis in a breast cancer model through inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 3 Breast Cancer Res 2011 13 3 R66 10.1186/bcr2903 21693010
122 Serafini P et al Phosphodiesterase-5 inhibition augments endogenous antitumor immunity by reducing myeloid-derived suppressor cell function J Exp Med 2006 203 12 2691 2702 10.1084/jem.20061104 17101732
123 Hassel JC et al Tadalafil has biologic activity in human melanoma. Results of a pilot trial with Tadalafil in patients with metastatic Melanoma (TaMe) Oncoimmunology 2017 6 9 e1326440 10.1080/2162402X.2017.1326440 28932631
124 Long GV et al Epacadostat plus pembrolizumab versus placebo plus pembrolizumab in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma (ECHO-301/KEYNOTE-252): a phase 3, randomised, double-blind study Lancet Oncol 2019 20 8 1083 1097 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30274-8 31221619
125 Gomes B et al Characterization of the selective indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase-1 (IDO1) catalytic inhibitor EOS200271/PF-06840003 supports IDO1 as a critical resistance mechanism to PD-(L)1 blockade therapy Mol Cancer Ther 2018 17 12 2530 2542 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-1104 30232146
126 Pinton L et al Activated T cells sustain myeloid-derived suppressor cell-mediated immune suppression Oncotarget 2016 7 2 1168 1184 10.18632/oncotarget.6662 26700461
127 Xin H et al Sunitinib inhibition of Stat3 induces renal cell carcinoma tumor cell apoptosis and reduces immunosuppressive cells Cancer Res 2009 69 6 2506 2513 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-4323 19244102
128 Liu F et al Stat3-targeted therapies overcome the acquired resistance to vemurafenib in melanomas J Invest Dermatol 2013 133 8 2041 2049 10.1038/jid.2013.32 23344460
129 Hong D et al AZD9150, a next-generation antisense oligonucleotide inhibitor of STAT3 with early evidence of clinical activity in lymphoma and lung cancer Sci Transl Med 2015 7 314 314ra185 26582900
130 Wong ALA et al Do STAT3 inhibitors have potential in the future for cancer therapy? Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2017 26 8 883 887 10.1080/13543784.2017.1351941
131 Bitsch R et al STAT3 inhibitor Napabucasin abrogates MDSC immunosuppressive capacity and prolongs survival of melanoma-bearing mice J Immunother Cancer 2022 10 3 e004384 10.1136/jitc-2021-004384 35301236
132 Karan D Inflammasomes: emerging central players in cancer immunology and immunotherapy Front Immunol 2018 9 3028 10.3389/fimmu.2018.03028 30631327
133 Tengesdal IW et al Targeting tumor-derived NLRP3 reduces melanoma progression by limiting MDSCs expansion Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2021 118 10 e2000915118 10.1073/pnas.2000915118 33649199
134 Gabrilovich D et al Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibits the development of dendritic cells and dramatically affects the differentiation of multiple hematopoietic lineages in vivo Blood 1998 92 11 4150 4166 10.1182/blood.V92.11.4150 9834220
135 Melani C et al Myeloid cell expansion elicited by the progression of spontaneous mammary carcinomas in c-erbB-2 transgenic BALB/c mice suppresses immune reactivity Blood 2003 102 6 2138 2145 10.1182/blood-2003-01-0190 12750171
136 Wright MA et al Stimulation of immune suppressive CD34+ cells from normal bone marrow by Lewis lung carcinoma tumors Cancer Immunol Immunother 1998 46 5 253 260 10.1007/s002620050485 9690453
137 Pan PY et al Reversion of immune tolerance in advanced malignancy: modulation of myeloid-derived suppressor cell development by blockade of stem-cell factor function Blood 2008 111 1 219 228 10.1182/blood-2007-04-086835 17885078
138 Gargett T et al GM-CSF signalling blockade and chemotherapeutic agents act in concert to inhibit the function of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in vitro Clin Transl Immunology 2016 5 12 e119 10.1038/cti.2016.80 28090321
139 Gomez-Roca CA et al Phase I study of emactuzumab single agent or in combination with paclitaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors reveals depletion of immunosuppressive M2-like macrophages Ann Oncol 2019 30 8 1381 1392 10.1093/annonc/mdz163 31114846
140 Verza FA et al Roles of histone deacetylases and inhibitors in anticancer therapy Cancers (Basel) 2020 12 6 1664 10.3390/cancers12061664 32585896
141 Li G et al The roles of histone deacetylases and their inhibitors in cancer therapy Front Cell Dev Biol 2020 8 576946 10.3389/fcell.2020.576946 33117804
142 Ny L et al The PEMDAC phase 2 study of pembrolizumab and entinostat in patients with metastatic uveal melanoma Nat Commun 2021 12 1 5155 10.1038/s41467-021-25332-w 34453044
143 Li X et al HDAC inhibition potentiates anti-tumor activity of macrophages and enhances anti-PD-L1-mediated tumor suppression Oncogene 2021 40 10 1836 1850 10.1038/s41388-020-01636-x 33564072
144 Kowanetz M et al Granulocyte-colony stimulating factor promotes lung metastasis through mobilization of Ly6G+Ly6C+ granulocytes Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010 107 50 21248 21255 10.1073/pnas.1015855107 21081700
145 Priceman SJ et al Targeting distinct tumor-infiltrating myeloid cells by inhibiting CSF-1 receptor: combating tumor evasion of antiangiogenic therapy Blood 2010 115 7 1461 1471 10.1182/blood-2009-08-237412 20008303
146 Li Y et al Targeting myeloid-derived suppressor cells to attenuate vasculogenic mimicry and synergistically enhance the anti-tumor effect of PD-1 inhibitor iScience 2021 24 12 103392 10.1016/j.isci.2021.103392 34841231
147 Martino EC et al Immune-modulating effects of bevacizumab in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer patients Cell Death Discov 2016 2 16025 27752361
148 Manzoni M et al Immunological effects of bevacizumab-based treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer Oncology 2010 79 3-4 187 196 10.1159/000320609 21358206
149 Marguier A et al TIE-2 signaling activation by angiopoietin 2 on myeloid-derived suppressor cells promotes melanoma-specific T-cell inhibition Front Immunol 2022 13 932298 10.3389/fimmu.2022.932298 35935946
150 Sun Y et al CXC chemokine ligand-10 promotes the accumulation of monocyte-like myeloid-derived suppressor cells by activating p38 MAPK signaling under tumor conditions Cancer Sci 2023 114 1 142 151 10.1111/cas.15598 36168841
151 Xu C et al Artemisinins as anticancer drugs: novel therapeutic approaches, molecular mechanisms, and clinical trials Front Pharmacol 2020 11 529881 10.3389/fphar.2020.529881 33117153
152 Zhang M et al Targeting inhibition of accumulation and function of myeloid-derived suppressor cells by artemisinin via PI3K/AKT, mTOR, and MAPK pathways enhances anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy in melanoma and liver tumors J Immunol Res 2022 2022 2253436 35785030
153 Mirza N et al All-trans-retinoic acid improves differentiation of myeloid cells and immune response in cancer patients Cancer Res 2006 66 18 9299 9307 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-1690 16982775
154 Kusmartsev S et al All-trans-retinoic acid eliminates immature myeloid cells from tumor-bearing mice and improves the effect of vaccination Cancer Res 2003 63 15 4441 4449 12907617
155 O’Connor RS et al The CPT1a inhibitor, etomoxir induces severe oxidative stress at commonly used concentrations Sci Rep 2018 8 1 6289 10.1038/s41598-018-24676-6 29674640
156 Hossain F et al Inhibition of fatty acid oxidation modulates immunosuppressive functions of myeloid-derived suppressor cells and enhances cancer therapies Cancer Immunol Res 2015 3 11 1236 1247 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-15-0036 26025381
157 Xia C et al CD39/CD73/A2AR pathway and cancer immunotherapy Mol Cancer 2023 22 1 44 10.1186/s12943-023-01733-x 36859386
158 Augustin RC et al Next steps for clinical translation of adenosine pathway inhibition in cancer immunotherapy J Immunother Cancer 2022 10 2 e004089 10.1136/jitc-2021-004089 35135866
159 Young A et al Co-inhibition of CD73 and A2AR adenosine signaling improves anti-tumor immune responses Cancer Cell 2016 30 3 391 403 10.1016/j.ccell.2016.06.025 27622332
160 Zhao H et al Myeloid-derived itaconate suppresses cytotoxic CD8+ T cells and promotes tumour growth Nat Metab 2022 4 12 1660 1673 10.1038/s42255-022-00676-9 36376563
161 Harding HP et al Regulated translation initiation controls stress-induced gene expression in mammalian cells Mol Cell 2000 6 5 1099 1108 10.1016/S1097-2765(00)00108-8 11106749
162 Halaby MJ et al GCN2 drives macrophage and MDSC function and immunosuppression in the tumor microenvironment Sci Immunol 2019 4 42 eaax8189 10.1126/sciimmunol.aax8189 31836669
163 Paavola KJ et al The fibronectin-ILT3 interaction functions as a stromal checkpoint that suppresses myeloid cells Cancer Immunol Res 2021 9 11 1283 1297 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-21-0240 34426457
164 Singh L et al ILT3 (LILRB4) promotes the immunosuppressive function of tumor-educated human monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells Mol Cancer Res 2021 19 4 702 716 10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-20-0622 33372059
165 de Goeje PL et al Immunoglobulin-like transcript 3 is expressed by myeloid-derived suppressor cells and correlates with survival in patients with non-small cell lung cancer Oncoimmunology 2015 4 7 e1014242 10.1080/2162402X.2015.1014242 26140237