ABSTRACT Under steady-state conditions, bone marrow-derived immature myeloid cells (IMC) differentiate into granulocytes, macrophages and dendritic cells (DCs). This differentiation is

impaired under chronic inflammatory conditions, which are typical for tumour progression, leading to the accumulation of IMCs. These cells are capable of inducing strong immunosuppressive

effects through the expression of various cytokines and immune regulatory molecules, inhibition of lymphocyte homing, stimulation of other immunosuppressive cells, depletion of metabolites

critical for T cell functions, expression of ectoenzymes regulating adenosine metabolism, and the production of reactive species. IMCs are therefore designated as myeloid-derived suppressor

populations, their immunosuppressive capacity, and possible ways to inhibit MDSC function with different approaches being evaluated in clinical trials. This review analyses the current state

of knowledge on the origin and function of MDSCs in cancer, with a special emphasis on the immunosuppressive pathways pursued by MDSCs to inhibit T cell functions, resulting in tumour

progression. In addition, we describe therapeutic strategies and clinical benefits of MDSC targeting in cancer. SIMILAR CONTENT BEING VIEWED BY OTHERS MYELOID-DERIVED SUPPRESSOR CELLS IN

CANCER AND CANCER THERAPY Article 08 January 2024 MYELOID-DERIVED SUPPRESSOR CELLS AS IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE REGULATORS AND THERAPEUTIC TARGETS IN CANCER Article Open access 07 October 2021

MYELOID-DERIVED SUPPRESSOR CELL SUBTYPES DIFFERENTIALLY INFLUENCE T-CELL FUNCTION, T-HELPER SUBSET DIFFERENTIATION, AND CLINICAL COURSE IN CLL Article Open access 02 May 2021 INTRODUCTION

Myeloid cells play an important role in the innate immune response via the phagocytosis of pathogens (by macrophages), processing and presentation of antigens (by dendritic cells (DCs)),

induction of an inflammatory response (by neutrophils), and promotion of wound healing (by platelets). Normally, the process of myelopoiesis involves the differentiation of multipotent

progenitor cells and oligopotent myeloid precursors into unipotent monocytes, granulocytes, and DCs.1 Newly formed monocytes could further migrate into tissues where they differentiate into

macrophages and DCs.2 Immature myeloid cells (IMCs), which represent myeloid progenitor cells and do not show immunosuppressive functions, are believed to be constantly present in healthy

individuals. Chronic inflammatory conditions typical for cancers, chronic infections and autoimmune diseases were reported to impair IMC differentiation, supporting the accumulation of

MDSCs.3,4,5 Myelopoiesis can be disturbed by various conditions, such as inflammation. If inflammation is quickly resolved, then normal myelopoiesis can be restored; however, in the presence

of a chronic inflammatory environment, the differentiation process of myeloid cells is impaired.6 In cases of chronic infection or cancer, a decrease in the amount of peripheral myeloid

cells induces stronger myelopoiesis and increases the migration of cells before they have completed their differentiation process, which results in an accumulation of myeloid cells with

strong immunosuppressive patterns and functions.7,8,9 Due to their function and myeloid origin, this heterogeneous cell population has been termed myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs)

(Fig. 1 and Box 1).10 These cells represent a distinct population of IMCs that are being activated and expanded under chronic inflammatory conditions. Due to the high expression of immune

checkpoint molecules, depletion of metabolites, promotion of other immunosuppressive cell populations, production of reactive radicals and immunosuppressive adenosine, these cells inherit

powerful mechanisms to suppress the host’s immune system. Although MDSCs can also contribute to various aspects of tumour development, including angiogenesis and the formation of

pre-metastatic-niches, this review summarises the current state of knowledge on the mechanisms of MDSC-mediated suppression of T cell functions, thereby promoting cancer progression.11,12

BOX 1 Murine MDSCs are characterised by the co-expression of CD11b, an α-M integrin considered a pan-myeloid marker, and the myeloid differentiation antigen Gr1. The latter is a

glycosylphosphatidylinositol-linked protein that consists of Ly6C and Ly6G subunits, allowing the differentiation between Ly6ChighLy6G– monocytic (M-MDSCs) and Ly6ClowLy6G+ polymorphonuclear

MDSCs (PMN-MDSCs).124 These subpopulations inherit features of monocytes and granulocytes, respectively, and are both capable of eliciting strong immunosuppressive functions. In humans,

M-MDSCs are characterised as CD11b+CD14+HLA-DRlow/−CD15−; and PMN-MDSCs as CD14−CD11b+ CD15+ (or CD66b+) cells.125 Lectin-type oxidised LDL receptor-1 (LOX-1) has also been proposed as a new

marker to distinguish human PMN-MDSCs from non-immunosuppressive neutrophils.104 In addition, a subset of more immature human MDSCs defined as early-stage MDSCs (eMDSCs) lacks the

expression of mature blood cell markers (including CD3, CD14, CD15, CD19, CD56) and are therefore characterised as Lin–HLA-DR–CD33+.125 By contrast, an eMDSC equivalent in mice has not been

described. EXPANSION AND RECRUITMENT OF MDSCS Myelopoiesis has been shown to be altered at the stem-cell level in tumour-bearing mice, resulting in the accumulation of MDSCs accompanied by a

low number of mature B cells.13 The role of B cells in tumour progression has been controversially discussed, describing both pro-and anti-tumour effects of these cells.14 The expansion of

MDSCs is likely to be mediated by the same factors that regulate normal myelopoiesis, such as granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF), granulocyte colony-stimulating factor

(G-CSF), and macrophage colony-stimulating factor (M-CSF).15,16 Accordingly, _ex vivo_ differentiation of murine IMCs into immunosuppressive MDSCs can be achieved through stimulation with

GM-CSF and interleukin (IL)-6.17 IL-6 has been shown to promote the accumulation and immunosuppressive capacity of MDSCs mainly due to activation of the signal transducer and activator of

transcription (STAT)3-signalling pathway, although the underlying molecular mechanisms are not completely understood.18 High levels of secreted of GM-CSF are common among different tumour

entities and have been shown to induce the differentiation of MDSCs in mice with different transplantable tumours and with spontaneous breast tumours.19,20 In addition, GM-CSF blockade was

able to abolish the immunosuppressive features of human MDSCs in vitro, highlighting GM-CSF as one of the main regulators of MDSC expansion.21 Various tumour-derived factors have also been

shown to induce MDSCs in vitro, including prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), IL-6, IL-10, IL-1β, transforming growth factor (TGF)-β, as well as stem cell factor (SCF) and proangiogenic factors such as

vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF).17 Tumour cells are able to release these factors not only as soluble molecules but also entrapped within or bound to the surface of extracellular

vesicles.22 Uptake of these vesicles containing PGE2 and TGF-β by bone marrow IMCs in vivo led to their conversion into immunosuppressive MDSCs.22 The induction of immunosuppression through

tumour-derived extracellular vesicles seems to be an important mechanism of MDSC generation, as the pre-treatment of mice with these extracellular vesicles accelerates the formation of lung

metastasis upon i.v. injection of tumour cells.23 The Toll-like receptor (TLR) signalling pathway appears to play a major role in this experimental setting, as this effect is not observed in

the absence of MyD88, an important adaptor protein in TLR signalling.23 In addition, tumour extracellular vesicle-induced MDSCs from MyD88-deficient mice are less immunosuppressive than

those from wild-type controls.23 Various factors that accumulate in the tumour microenvironment (TME) in malignant diseases have been shown to contribute to the recruitment of MDSCs (Fig. 

2). The expression of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) by tumour cells, leading to the depletion of the essential amino acid tryptophan, was able to induce MDSC recruitment in mice, a

process that was dependent on regulatory T cells (Treg).24 Since altered IDO expression has been associated with rapid tumour progression, IDO-mediated recruitment of MDSCs can play an

important role in facilitating an immunosuppressive micromilieu.25 Hypoxia, which is commonly found in the TME, has also been recognised as in important factor in MDSC stimulation.26,27,28

Hypoxia-induced stabilisation of HIF-1 stimulated the expression of ectonucleoside triphosphate diphosphohydrolase 2 (ENTPD2/CD39L1), an ectoenzyme on MDSCs, leading to their accumulation.27

In a murine model of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), MDSC accumulation was described to be mediated by hypoxia-inducible factors (HIFs) such as digoxin and HIF-1, leading to the expression

of the chemokine CCL26 on tumour cells and accumulation of MDSCs positive for the expression of CX3CR1, a CCL26 receptor in hypoxic tumour regions.26 Migration of MDSCs to the tumour site

can also be mediated by various chemokines (Fig. 2).29 Studies have demonstrated an increase in the intratumoural expression of CCL2 in colorectal cancer patients, and a decrease in the

numbers of MDSCs and immunosuppressive features of polymorphonuclear (PMN)-MDSCs, after CCL2 deletion in a spontaneous mouse model of colorectal cancer.30 Furthermore, CCL2 accumulation was

found to correlate with poor prognosis in glioblastoma patients, whereas deficiency of CCL2 reduced the recruitment of monocytic (M)-MDSCs and Treg cells in a glioblastoma mouse model.31

CXC-motif chemokines have also been shown to contribute to MDSC recruitment, for example CXCL12 and IL-8 (CXCL8) have been reported to induce MDSC migration in the TME.32,33 In addition to

the active recruitment of existing MDSCs, some cells can be converted into MDSCs. Adoptively transferred natural killer (NK) cells were shown to be converted in tumour-bearing mice by GM-CSF

into CD11b+Gr1+ MDSCs, which expressed arginase-1 (ARG-1), produced reactive oxygen species (ROS) and exerted immunosuppressive activity.34 MDSC IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE MECHANISMS MDSCs can

display potent immunosuppressive and tumour-promoting functions in the TME via multiple mechanisms: induction of immunosuppressive cells, blocking of lymphocyte homing, production of

reactive oxygen and nitrogen species, depletion of metabolites critical for T cell functions, expression of ectoenzymes that regulate adenosine metabolism, and expression of negative immune

checkpoint molecules (Fig. 3). INDUCTION OF OTHER IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE CELLS MDSCs were shown to be able to induce the _de novo_ generation of FoxP3+ Treg cells in vivo through a mechanism that

was mediated by interferon (IFN)-γ and IL-10, but was independent of nitric oxide (NO) production.35 CD14+HLA-DR–/low M-MDSCs isolated from patients with HCC could induce CD4+CD25+Foxp3+

Treg cells upon co-culture with autologous T cells.36 Furthermore, using a transplantable melanoma mouse model, it was demonstrated that Treg cells contribute to MDSC activity by inducing

the expression of members of the B7 family of immune-regulatory ligands, including B7-H1 (also known as programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1)), B7-H3 and B7-H4, as well as the production of

IL-10 in these cells.37 Recruitment of CCR5+ Treg cells was also observed in two melanoma mouse models, which was induced by the CCR5 ligands CCL3, CCL4 and CCL5, produced by intratumoural

M-MDSCs.38 M-MDSCs have also been described to secrete TGF-β and IL-10, which exert direct immunosuppressive effects on T effector cells or induce the generation of Treg cells.35 In

addition, _ex vivo_ differentiated murine MDSCs from wild-type mice showed increased expression of IL-10, TGF-β and iNOS when differentiated in the presence of TGF-β. In this study, TGF-β

also induced the expansion of M-MDSCs, which have been shown to have a higher immunosuppressive capacity compared to PMN-MDSC. Therefore, TGF-β is considered to be involved in the generation

of MDSCs and in the acquisition of their immunosuppressive pattern.39 In addition to Treg cell stimulation, MDSCs could shift macrophages to an M2-like phenotype with immunosuppressive

features and low IL-12 production, thereby promoting tumour growth (Fig. 3a).40 BLOCKING LYMPHOCYTE HOMING Spleen MDSCs were reported to induce downregulation of the cell adhesion molecule

L-selectin on CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, as well as on B cells in the spleen, leading to a reduction in the homing and antigen-dependent activation of CD8+ cells in lymph nodes.41,42 The

downregulation of L-selectin on naïve T cells was found to be inversely correlated with MDSC levels in mice and is likely to be mediated by the expression of the metalloprotease ADAM 17

(TACE) on the surface of MDSCs (Fig. 3b).43 In addition, M-MDSCs have been found to counteract the activation-induced changes in CD44, L-selectin (CD62L) and CD162 expression by T cells in

vitro.44 Downregulation of CD44, a receptor for the extracellular matrix component hyaluronic acid (HA), and CD162, a selectin P ligand, are believed to impair the extravasation and tissue

infiltration of T cells. Induced downregulation of these molecules via M-MDSCs was found to be dependent on NO production (Fig. 3b).44 PRODUCTION OF REACTIVE OXYGEN AND NITROGEN SPECIES

MDSCs are well known to secrete reactive oxygen species (ROS), which are toxic to most cell types and thus contribute to the eradication of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes. ROS include

superoxide anions, hydroxyl radicals, hydrogen peroxide and singlet oxygen. The main pathway of ROS production in MDSCs involves the NADPH oxidase isoforms NOX1, NOX2, NOX3 and NOX4, which

transfer electrons from NADPH to oxygen, creating superoxide radicals.45 Inhibiting the generation of ROS via the addition of catalase, an enzyme that detoxifies hydrogen peroxide, was shown

to impair the immunosuppressive effect of MDSCs in vitro.45 MDSCs isolated from mice lacking NOX2 produced lower amounts of ROS and failed to inhibit the IFN-γ secretion and proliferation

of antigen-specific CD8+ T cells.46 As well as their direct toxic effect towards tumour-directed immune cells, ROS also play a role in the expansion of MDSCs. Decreased ROS production

resulted in the differentiation of MDSCs into F4/80+ Gr1– macrophages or CD11c+CD11b+ DCs, indicating a role for NOX2 in the maintenance of the MDSC population (Fig. 3c).46 Augmented ROS

levels also stimulated the expression of VEGF receptors on MDSCs, contributing to MDSC recruitment into the TME.47 In a spontaneous melanoma mouse model, inducible NO synthase

(iNOS)-dependent production of VEGF was identified as a key regulator of intratumoural MDSC accumulation.48 IMCs from wild-type mice showed a high expression of both VEGFR1 and VEGFR2 after

treatment with tumour cell-conditioned medium, indicating a prominent role of these receptors in the accumulation and recruitment of MDSCs.48 This assumption was supported by the finding of

increased expression of VEGFR1 and 2 on intratumoural MDSCs from a mouse ovarian cancer model, which was associated with their accumulation at the tumour site.49 VEGF-mediated activation of

the transcription factor STAT3 is assumed to be the main mechanism of VEGF-mediated MDSC activation.50,51 Interestingly, STAT3 activation induced VEGF expression, which could create a

positive feedback loop.52,53 MDSCs themselves were found to be partially protected from the detrimental effects of ROS through the expression of the Nrf2 transcription factor, an important

mediator of the cellular antioxidant response.54 Tumour-derived MDSCs from Nrf2–/– mice displayed an increased level of apoptosis, reduced secretion of hydrogen peroxide and increased levels

of oxidative stress, indicating a role for Nrf2 in promoting MDSC survival and function.54 In addition, MDSCs are characterised by a distinct metabolic programme with increased glycolysis,

which leads to the intracellular accumulation of the anti-oxidative intermediate phosphoenolpyruvate (PEP).55 As a result, increased rates of glycolysis were shown to prevent ROS-induced

apoptosis of MDSCs and promote their accumulation in vivo.55 Furthermore, scavenging of ROS leads to the _ex vivo_ increased differentiation of IMCs isolated from tumour bearing mice into

DCs and macrophages, indicating an influence of ROS in maintaining the MDSC population.56 In addition to producing ROS, MDSCs produce high levels of reactive nitrogen species (RNS),

predominantly nitric oxide (NO), via the activation of iNOS.57 Accumulating NO levels were demonstrated to strongly induce the expression of cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) and HIF-1α.41,42

Together with COX-1 and prostaglandin synthases,58,59 COX-2 regulates the production of PGE2.60 PGE2 has been shown to induce the upregulation of IDO, IL-10, ARG-1 and other

immunosuppressive markers in _ex vivo_-generated MDSCs.61 In addition, recent studies linked PGE2 to the overexpression of DNA methyltransferase 3 A (DNMT3A) in MDSCs, resulting in the

activation of these cells.62 Enhanced HIF-1α expression stimulated the production of VEGF, which is not only important for angiogenesis but has also been shown to inhibit the differentiation

of DCs and to induce Treg cell accumulation.63 In the presence of low L-arginine levels, which can occur due to metabolite depletion by MDSCs, iNOS was demonstrated to stimulate the

production of peroxynitrites (ONOO2), highly reactive radicals that can cause T cell apoptosis, as well as nitration of the T cell receptors (TCRs), thereby blocking T cell activation.64 RNS

in the TME were shown to induce the nitration of chemokines such as CCL2, which could inhibit the recruitment of tumour-reactive lymphocytes.65 Interestingly, the migration of MDSCs, which

is partially dependent on CCL2, was not affected by CCL2 nitration.65 Further studies revealed an inhibitory effect of iNOS-dependent NO production in MDSCs on different FcR-mediated

functions of NK cells.66 Adoptive transfer of MDSCs in a murine pancreatic cancer model impaired NK cell-mediated antibody-dependent cytotoxicity, cytokine production, and signal

transduction, leading to impaired efficacy of monoclonal antibody therapy.66 Another molecule that is believed to contribute to free radical production in MDSCs is myeloperoxidase (MPO), an

enzyme that is highly abundant in neutrophils and PMN-MDSCs, inducing cytotoxicity during the respiratory burst.67 Splenic PMN-MDSCs from tumour-bearing mice displayed an increased activity

of MPO, ARG-1 and ROS producing enzymes, which correlated with their ability to suppress antigen-specific T cell responses in vitro.67 In this setting, PMN-MDSCs expressed high levels of

CD115 and CD244 compared to splenic neutrophils from wild-type controls. In addition, the MPO level have been shown to be increased in the plasma of renal cell carcinoma patients, presumably

produced by PMN-MDSC.68 DEPLETION OF METABOLITES CRITICAL FOR T CELL FUNCTIONS MDSCs can decrease the availability of metabolites and factors, such as L-arginine, that are crucial for the

function of the mammalian immune system. L-arginine is the substrate for four different enzymes expressed in MDSCs as different isoforms of nitric oxide synthases (NOS1, NOS2, and NOS3),

arginases (ARG-1 and ARG–2), arginine-glycine amidinotransferase, and L-arginine decarboxylase. Whereas NOS catalyse the conversion of L-arginine to NO and l-citrulline, arginases support

the reaction of L-arginine to L-ornithine and urea.69 L-ornithine can be further metabolised to L-proline, an important precursor for collagen synthesis and immunosuppressive polyamines.

ARG-1 upregulation in MDSCs leads not only to the inhibition of T cell functions, but also contributes to the production of extracellular matrix components and therefore tissue remodelling

and tumour growth.69 The expression of ARG-1 by MDSCs can be induced by the Th2 cytokines IL-4, IL-10 and IL-13. By contrast, expression of iNOS is mainly regulated by the Th1 cytokines

IFN-γ, TNF-β and TNF-α.69 In addition, activation of TLRs through lipopolysaccharide has also been shown to induce both ARG-1 and iNOS expression.69 MDSCs have also been reported to deplete

L-arginine from the TME through increased uptake mediated by the CAT-2B transporter, followed by L-arginine degradation mediated by increased ARG-1 expression in these cells.70 The lack of

extracellular L-arginine could inhibit the proliferation of activated T cells and reduce the expression of the TCR-ζ chain (Fig. 3d).70 In this case, the reduced expression of the TCR-ζ

chain is probably due to a shorter half-life span of the TCR-ζ chain mRNA, since this mechanism has been shown to be present in Jurkat T cells in vitro.71 Interestingly, a recent paper

reported that ARG-1 expression is not crucial for MDSC-mediated immunosuppression, although ARG-1 expression could be induced by activated T cells.72 In this setting, direct cell-cell

contact was necessary for MDSCs to inhibit T cell proliferation. Thus, the authors concluded that soluble factors play only a secondary role in the inhibition of T cell proliferation,

compared with surface molecules such as PD-L1.72 Since numerous studies demonstrated a contribution of ARG-1 to MDSC function, further investigations will be necessary to define its exact

role in MDSC function. Due to its ability to form disulphide bonds, cysteine is known as an important prerequisite for protein biosynthesis. Most mammalian cells can synthesise cysteine from

intracellular methionine using the enzyme cystathionine γ-lyase, or can import oxidised cysteine (cystine) via the SLC7A11 cysteine/glutamate antiporter.73 However, as T cells lack

cystathionine and do not express cystine transporters, cysteine is considered as an essential amino acid for T cells.74 Macrophages and DCs supply T cells with cysteine by taking up cystine

through their SLC7A11 transporters, reducing cystine to cysteine intracellularly, and finally secreting cysteine into the extracellular space through alanine–serine–cysteine (ASC)

transporters. Thereby, T cells are enabled to take up cysteine via their ASC transporters. MDSCs have been shown to express the SLC7A11 transporter but not the ASC transporter, enabling them

to deplete cystine without secreting cysteine, thereby impairing T cell functions (Fig. 3d).75 As cysteine is also involved in the generation of glutathione, an antioxidative molecule

protecting cells from free radicals including ROS, MDSCs can also impair the resistance of immune cells to ROS.76 EXPRESSION OF ECTOENZYMES REGULATING ADENOSINE METABOLISM Another mechanism

used by MDSCs to inhibit T cell functions includes the generation of adenosine from ATP.77 Ectonucleoside triphosphate diphosphohydrolase 1 (E-NTPDase1, CD39) is known to convert ATP

released into the extracellular space into AMP, before ecto-5’-nucleotidase (Ecto5’NTase, CD73) catalyses its dephosphorylation into adenosine. Extracellular adenosine was demonstrated to

inhibit priming of naïve T cells by preventing phosphorylation of Zap70, ERK and Akt,78 as well as reducing the expression of effector molecules on activated T cells such as CD95L, perforin,

IFN-γ, TNF-α and CD25 (Fig. 3e).79 Furthermore, it was recently reported that tumour-derived TGF-β induced the expression of CD39 and CD73 on MDSCs isolated from the peripheral blood and

tumours of patients with non-small cell lung cancer in a HIF-1α-dependent manner, resulting in the accumulation of immunosuppressive adenosine.77 In line with these findings, activation of

AMP-activated protein kinase α (AMPKα) through administration of the drug metformin downregulated the expression of HIF-1, CD39 and CD73 in MDSCs, which was associated with a longer overall

survival in patients with ovarian carcinoma, alongside a decrease in the number of circulating CD39+CD73+ MDSCs and enhanced anti-tumour activities of circulating CD8+ T cells.80 These

findings implicate ectoenzymes as potential new therapeutic targets in cancer treatment. EXPRESSION OF NEGATIVE IMMUNE CHECKPOINT MOLECULES PD-L1 is known to be a prominent negative

regulator of T cell functions and a mediator of immune evasion by tumour cells.81 Inhibition of signalling by PD-L1 or another immune-checkpoint component, CTLA-4, has proven to be

beneficial for cancer patient survival. The success of this approach seems to be dependent on T cells infiltrating the tumour, and therefore works better in so-called ‘hot’ tumours, such as

malignant melanoma, which show a strong infiltration with immune cells.82,83 PD-L1 exerts its effect by binding to its receptor PD-1 on T cells, inducing T cell anergy and apoptosis. Not

surprisingly, PD-L1 expression on MDSCs has been shown in various reports to be a potent mediator of immunosuppression and to be increased in cancer patients and tumour-bearing mice,

compared with healthy controls.84,85 Not only has the number of MDSCs been shown to be increased in tumour tissue from patients with non-small cell lung cancer, but tumour-associated

PMN-MDSCs were found to express higher levels of PD-L1 than their circulating counterparts.84 PD-L1 expression on PMN-MDSCs was also found to be higher among non-responding

ipilimumab-treated melanoma patients, compared to responding patients.86 Furthermore, low MDSC levels prior to treatment with ipilimumab, which blocks CTLA-4, were associated with better

survival in advanced melanoma patients, indicating a possible function for MDSCs as a predictive biomarker for therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors.87 The induction of PD-L1 on IMC has

been recently shown to be mediated by soluble factors M-CSF and VEGF ex vivo.88 In a murine model of colorectal cancer, PD-L1 induction in MDSCs could be significantly decreased after the

neutralisation of IFN-γ.85 SIGNALLING PATHWAYS IMPORTANT FOR MDSC-MEDIATED IMMUNOSUPPRESSION The immunosuppressive phenotype of MDSCs relies on the activation of different intracellular

signalling pathways, which are often stimulated through the interaction of MDSCs with immune cells. In this context, the Janus kinase (JAK)–STAT signalling pathway is of special interest.

Activation of chemokine, cytokine or growth factor receptors by their cognate ligands induces the recruitment and stimulation of JAK, followed by activation of STAT proteins.89 In the

context of MDSC activation, STAT3 and STAT1 are considered to be the major contributors to immunosuppressive mechanisms. Activated T cells were reported to secrete IL-10, which induces PD-L1

expression on MDSCs in a STAT3-dependent manner.90 Furthermore, STAT3 activation could induce VEGF production in MDSCs, whereas STAT3 inhibition by the tyrosine-kinase inhibitor sunitinib

reduced tumour angiogenesis and MDSC expansion in vivo.91 As mentioned above, VEGF-mediated STAT3 activation leads to further secretion of VEGF and expression of VEGF receptors, thereby

supporting MDSC accumulation and tumour growth.50,51,52,53,91 STAT3 also directly regulates the expression of NOX2 and the calcium-binding pro-inflammatory proteins S100A9 and S100A8.46,92

These proteins were shown to activate signalling through nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) in MDSCs and to contribute to the production of ROS.92,93 Activation of the NF-κB pathway is known to be a

potent inducer of COX-2 expression, which ultimately leads to the production of PGE2.94 Increased COX-2 mRNA expression correlates positively with ARG-1 and NOS2 transcript levels in

tumour-infiltrating MDSCs, and thus a regulatory function for PGE2 on the expression of these immunosuppressive proteins may be assumed.6 Furthermore, PGE2 has been shown to induce the

generation of MDSCs from murine bone marrow stem cells, which is at least partially mediated through the activation of the PGE2 receptor EP2.95 The expansion and activation of MDSCs was

found to be mediated by STAT1–IFN-γ-dependent signalling, which has been shown to be involved in the upregulation of the anti-apoptotic protein Bcl2a1.96 Activation of STAT6 through the

binding of IL-4 or IL-13 to IL-4Rα induced an immunosuppressive pattern of MDSCs, as reflected by the expression of ARG-1 and TGF-β.97 Furthermore, the upregulation of PD-L1 expression on

MDSCs through IFN-γ was demonstrated to be mediated by subsequent activation of STAT1 and interferon regulatory factor 1 (IRF1).85 Finally, the pro-inflammatory cytokine IL-6, which is

produced by various tumours, was found to be involved in the expansion and activation of MDSCs via inhibition of the suppressor of cytokine signalling 3 (SOCS3) protein, leading to

phosphorylation of JAK1, JAK2, TYK2, STAT1 and STAT3 proteins.18 RELATION OF MDSCS TO IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE NEUTROPHILS Recent studies have indicated that neutrophils can also promote tumour

progression and metastasis formation under specific conditions through the induction of angiogenesis and an immunosuppressive environment.98 PMN cells have gained increasing interest over

the past decade due to accumulating evidence indicating that tumour-associated neutrophils promote tumour growth, and the fact that PMN-MDSCs are the prominent subtype of MDSC in most murine

tumour models and human cancers.99,100 The discrimination between PMN-MDSCs and neutrophil subpopulations is still a subject of debate. Some studies suggest that PMN-MDSCs represent a group

of pathologically activated neutrophils, also termed N2 neutrophils.101 These cells can elicit powerful tumour-promoting mechanisms, including upregulation of ARG-1 expression and

angiogenesis as well as the stimulation of metastasis formation. By contrast, N1-type neutrophils display functions of classical neutrophils like phagocytosis, antibody-dependent

cytotoxicity and recruitment of leukocytes.102 It is hypothesised that N2 neutrophils are either recruited peripheral PMN-MDSCs or peripheral-blood-derived neutrophils that acquire an N2

phenotype under the influence of TGF-β in the TME.103 LOX-1 has been identified as a marker of human immunosuppressive PMN-MDSCs that can distinguish them from non-suppressive neutrophils,

although the LOX-1 equivalent in mice was not found to be sufficient to distinguish these cells from classical neutrophils.104 In peripheral blood, neutrophils can be separated, based on

their density, into tumour-promoting low-density neutrophils (LDNs) and high-density neutrophils (HDNs), which represent classical innate immune cells.105 Although LDNs could not be detected

in the peripheral blood of healthy subjects, this population was found to be expanded in cancer patients and tumour-bearing mice.105 It has been proposed that the LDN fraction consists of

mature N2-neutrophils and immature PMN-MDSCs.105 MDSC TARGETING IN CANCER THERAPY Increasing numbers of preclinical and clinical studies have been performed over past years, that have sought

to evaluate the safety and efficacy of MDSC inhibition alone or in combination with radiotherapy, chemotherapy, surgery or different kinds of immunotherapy to target cancers. Current

treatment strategies aim to deplete MDSCs, inhibit their immunosuppressive potential, block their recruitment to the tumour site, or to modulate myelopoiesis.106 Treatment of pancreatic

cancer patients with the chemotherapeutic drug gemcitabine reduced numbers of PMN-MDSCs and Tregs.107 In addition, immunotherapeutic treatment approaches with IL-2 and anti-CD40 antibody

sensitised MDSCs to Fas-mediated apoptosis in different murine tumour models, highlighting the possible use of existing therapies to efficiently deplete MDSC in cancer patients.108 Treatment

with an agonist of TLR8, which is expressed on M-MDSCs but not PMN-MDSCs, has been reported to induce Fas–FasL-dependent apoptosis and to restore IL-2 secretion by T cells activated via

CD3–CD28.109 Blocking the immunosuppressive function of MDSCs can be achieved by targeting phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)δ and PI3Kγ. PI3K activation leads to the inhibition of NF-κB

and activation of C/EBPβ, thereby initiating an immunosuppressive transcriptional program.110 Knockout of PI3K was found to reduce the accumulation of PMN-MDSC in tumour-bearing mice,

breaking immune tolerance to cancer.111 Inhibition of both isoforms of this kinase delayed tumour growth and prolonged survival in tumour models of head and neck cancer, when used in

combination with a PD-L1 blocking antibody, indicating a beneficial effect of MDSC inhibition in combination with immune-checkpoint inhibition.112 Targeting PD-L1 or CTLA-4 has led to

durable responses in different cancer entities, but only in a subset of patients. Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, for example, shows a strong de novo resistance to CTLA4

blockade.113 In a newly developed chimeric mouse model of prostate cancer, combined treatment with PD-L1 inhibition as well as multi-kinase inhibitors cabozantinib and BEZ235, which induce a

decrease in MDSC function, proved to be considerably more effective than treatment with a single agent.114 This highlights the necessity of including MDSC neutralisation in novel strategies

of combined cancer treatment. The recently described modulating effects of the diarylheptanoid curcumin on STAT3 and JAK2 signalling, leading to a decreased production of IL-6 in MDSCs,

could also be beneficial in combined therapies while eliciting no adverse effects.115 Several attempts to apply STAT3 inhibitors in clinical studies for targeting tumour-associated myeloid

cells were hindered by the unexpected adverse effects and limited efficacy of these compounds.116 More recent approaches aim to interfere with STAT3 mRNA by the administration of siRNA or

decoy oligonucleotides. For example, AZD9150 is a STAT3 oligonucleotide inhibitor that is currently under investigation in combination with immune-checkpoint inhibitors in phase I/II

clinical trials.106 Mobilisation of MDSCs from the bone marrow has been shown to be inhibited through the administration of bisphosphonates, drugs that are used to prevent bone loss in

cancer patients with bone metastases.117 Bisphosphonates can prevent prenylation of matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) from undergoing prenylation, a post-translational modification that is

essential for their function. As a result of reduced MMP9 prenylation, cleavage of the tyrosine kinase c-Kit is diminished, causing reduced mobilisation of MDSCs and reduced VEGF release.117

Most MMP inhibitors failed in different clinical trials, showing severe side effects that hamper their usage to inhibit MDSCs mobilisation in cancer.118 Amino-bisphosphonates show a good

safety and tolerance and seem to exert therapeutic effects, making them promising candidates to target MDSCs.119,120,121 Other therapeutic approaches are aimed at promoting MDSC

differentiation, which can be achieved by all-trans-retinoic acid (ATRA). ATRA was reported to induce the rapid differentiation of MDSCs into macrophages and DCs, which was associated with

the reduction of ROS production, via the activation of the ERK1/2 kinase pathway.122 In addition, ATRA enhanced the immune response to vaccination with DCs in small-cell lung cancer patients

by effectively depleting MDSCs.123 Furthermore, pharmacological inhibition of the ATP-converting ectoenzyme ENTPD2 was reported to promote MDSC differentiation, to delay the growth of HCC,

and to contribute to the beneficial effects of immune checkpoint inhibition.27 CONCLUSION Numerous publications have documented a pivotal role for highly immunosuppressive MDSCs in tumour

progression in mice and cancer patients. This heterogeneous population of IMCs, which is generated and activated under chronic inflammatory conditions and accumulates in the TME, represents

one of the major hurdles for efficient cancer immunotherapy. Accordingly, inhibition of MDSCs in cancer therapy has proven to be a potentially promising and well-tolerated treatment. As the

enrichment and activation of MDSCs seem to be a general characteristic of malignant diseases, targeting these cells could be applied to treat various tumour entities. It is therefore

critically important to combine the neutralisation of different MDSC functions with current treatment strategies to increase the efficacy of these therapies. However, despite promising

preclinical data, more clinical studies are needed to demonstrate the synergistic effects of inhibiting MDSC mobilisation and functions in conjunction with existing immunotherapies.

REFERENCES * Weiskopf, Kipp et al. Myeloid cell origins, differentiation, and clinical implications. _Microbiol. Spectr._ 42, 407–420 (2016). Google Scholar  * Velten, L. et al. Human

haematopoietic stem cell lineage commitment is a continuous process. _Nat. Cell Biol._ 19, 271–281 (2017). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Ioannou, M. et al. Crucial

role of granulocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells in the regulation of central nervous system autoimmune disease. _J. Immunol._ 188, 1136–1146 (2012). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google

Scholar  * Dorhoi, A. & Plessis, N. Du. Monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells in chronic infections. _Front_. _Immunol_. 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2017.01895 (2018). * Meyer,

C. et al. Chronic inflammation promotes myeloid-derived suppressor cell activation blocking antitumor immunity in transgenic mouse melanoma model. _Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA_ 108,

17111–17116 (2011). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Condamine, T. & Gabrilovich, D. I. Molecular mechanisms regulating myeloid-derived suppressor cell

differentiation and function. _Trends Immunol._ 32, 19–25 (2011). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Ueda, Y., Cain, D. W., Kuraoka, M., Kondo, M. & Kelsoe, G. IL-1R type

I-dependent hemopoietic stem cell proliferation is necessary for inflammatory granulopoiesis and reactive neutrophilia. _J. Immunol._ 182, 6477–6484 (2009). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google

Scholar  * Ueda, Y., Kondo, M. & Kelsoe, G. Inflammation and the reciprocal production of granulocytes and lymphocytes in bone marrow. _J. Exp. Med._ 201, 1771–1780 (2005). Article  CAS

  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Jordan, K. R. et al. Immunosuppressive myeloid-derived suppressor cells are increased in splenocytes from cancer patients. _Cancer Immunol.

Immunother._ 66, 503–513 (2017). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Gabrilovich, D. I. et al. The terminology issue for myeloid-derived suppressor cells. _Cancer Res._

67, 3986 (2007). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Shi, H. et al. Recruited monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells promote the arrest of tumor cells in the premetastatic niche through an

IL-1β-mediated increase in E-selectin expression. _Int. J. Cancer_ 140, 1370–1383 (2017). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Binsfeld, M. et al. Granulocytic myeloid-derived suppressor

cells promote angiogenesis in the context of multiple myeloma. _Oncotarget_ 7, 37931–37943 (2016). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Kamran, N. et al. Melanoma induced

immunosuppression is mediated by hematopoietic dysregulation. _Oncoimmunology_ 7, e1408750 (2018). Article  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Sarvaria, A., Madrigal, J. A. & Saudemont, A. B cell

regulation in cancer and anti-tumor immunity. _Cell Mol. Immunol._ 14, 662–674 (2017). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Barreda, D. R., Hanington, P. C. &

Belosevic, M. Regulation of myeloid development and function by colony stimulating factors. _Dev. Comp. Immunol._ 28, 509–554 (2004). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Dolcetti, L. et

al. Hierarchy of immunosuppressive strength among myeloid-derived suppressor cell subsets is determined by GM-CSF. _Eur. J. Immunol._ 40, 22–35 (2010). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

* Lechner, M. G., Liebertz, D. J. & Epstein, A. L. Characterization of cytokine-induced myeloid-derived suppressor cells from normal human peripheral blood mononuclear cells. _J.

Immunol._ 185, 2273–2284 (2010). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Jiang, M. et al. Interleukin-6 trans-signaling pathway promotes immunosuppressive myeloid-derived suppressor cells

via suppression of suppressor of cytokine signaling 3 in breast cancer. _Front. Immunol._ 8, 1840 (2017). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar  * Bronte, V. et al. Unopposed

production of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor by tumors inhibits CD8+T cell responses by dysregulating antigen-presenting cell maturation. _J. Immunol._ 162, 5728–5737

(1999). CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Morales, J. K., Kmieciak, M., Knutson, K. L., Bear, H. D. & Manjili, M. H. GM-CSF is one of the main breast tumor-derived soluble factors involved

in the differentiation of CD11b-Gr1- bone marrow progenitor cells into myeloid-derived suppressor cells. _Breast Cancer Res. Treat._ 123, 39–49 (2010). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

* 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. Immunol._ 5,

e119 (2016). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Xiang, X. et al. Induction of myeloid-derived suppressor cells by tumor exosomes. _Int. J. Cancer_ 124, 2621–2633 (2009). Article  CAS  PubMed 

PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Liu, Y. et al. Contribution of MyD88 to the tumor exosome-mediated induction of myeloid derived suppressor cells. _Am. J. Pathol._ 176, 2490–2499 (2010).

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Holmgaard, R. B. et al. Tumor-expressed ido recruits and activates MDSCs in a treg-dependent manner. _Cell Rep._ 13, 412–424 (2015).

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Munn, D. H. Blocking IDO activity to enhance anti-tumor immunity. _Front. Biosci._ E4, 734–745 (2012). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  *

Chiu, D. K.-C. et al. Hypoxia induces myeloid-derived suppressor cell recruitment to hepatocellular carcinoma through chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 26. _Hepatology_ 64, 797–813 (2016).

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Chiu, D. K.-C. et al. Hypoxia inducible factor HIF-1 promotes myeloid-derived suppressor cells accumulation through ENTPD2/CD39L1 in hepatocellular

carcinoma. _Nat. Commun._ 8, 517 (2017). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar  * Noman, M. Z. 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._ 211, 781–790 (2014). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Umansky, V. & Sevko, A. Tumor microenvironment and

myeloid-derived suppressor cells. _Cancer Microenviron._ 6, 169–177 (2013). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Chun, E. et al. CCL2 Promotes colorectal carcinogenesis by enhancing

polymorphonuclear myeloid-derived suppressor cell population and function. _Cell Rep._ 12, 244–257 (2015). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Chang, A. L. et al. CCL2

produced by the glioma microenvironment is essential for the recruitment of regulatory T cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells. _Cancer Res._ 76, 5671–5682 (2016). Article  CAS  PubMed

  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Obermajer, N., Muthuswamy, R., Odunsi, K., Edwards, R. P. & Kalinski, P. PGE2-induced CXCL12 production and CXCR4 expression controls the accumulation

of human mdscs in ovarian cancer environment. _Cancer Res._ 71, 7463–7470 (2011). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Alfaro, C. et al. Tumor-produced interleukin-8

attracts human myeloid-derived suppressor cells and elicits extrusion of neutrophil extracellular traps (NETs). _Clin. Cancer Res._ 22, 3924–3936 (2016). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar

  * Park, Y.-J. et al. Tumor microenvironmental conversion of natural killer cells into myeloid-derived suppressor cells. _Cancer Res._ 73, 5669–5681 (2013). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google

Scholar  * Huang, B. et al. Gr-1 + CD115 + immature myeloid suppressor cells mediate the development of tumor-induced T regulatory cells and T cell anergy in tumor-bearing host. _Cancer

Res._ 66, 1123–1131 (2006). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Zhao, F., Korangy, F. & Greten, T. F. Cellular immune suppressor mechanisms in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.

_Dig. Dis._ 30, 477–482 (2012). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Fujimura, T., Ring, S., Umansky, V., Mahnke, K. & Enk, A. H. Regulatory T cells stimulate B7-H1 expression in

myeloid-derived suppressor cells in ret melanomas. _J. Invest. Dermatol._ 132, 1239–1246 (2012). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Schlecker, E. et al. Tumor-infiltrating monocytic

myeloid-derived suppressor cells mediate CCR5-dependent recruitment of regulatory T cells favoring tumor growth. _J. Immunol._ 189, 5602–5611 (2012). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  *

Lee, C. R., Lee, W., Cho, S. K. & Park, S. G. Characterization of multiple cytokine combinations and TGF-β on differentiation and functions of myeloid-derived suppressor cells. _Int. J.

Mol. Sci._ 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms19030869 (2018). Article  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar  * Beury, D. W. et al. Cross-talk among myeloid-derived suppressor cells,

macrophages, and tumor cells impacts the inflammatory milieu of solid tumors. _J. Leukoc. Biol._ 96, 1109–1118 (2014). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar  * Ku, A. W. et

al. Tumor-induced MDSC act via remote control to inhibit L-selectin-dependent adaptive immunity in lymph nodes. _eLife_ 5, e17375 (2016). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  *

Ostrand-Rosenberg, S. & Sinha, P. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells: linking inflammation and cancer. _J. Immunol._ 182, 4499–4506 (2009). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Hanson,

E. M., Clements, V. K., Sinha, P., Ilkovitch, D. & Ostrand-Rosenberg, S. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells down-regulate L-selectin expression on CD4+ and CD8+T cells. _J. Immunol._ 183,

937–944 (2009). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Schouppe, E. et al. Tumor-induced myeloid-derived suppressor cell subsets exert either inhibitory or stimulatory effects on distinct

CD8+T cell activation events. _Eur. J. Immunol._ 43, 2930–2942 (2013). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Liu, Y., Wei, J., Guo, G. & Zhou, J. Norepinephrine-induced myeloid-derived

suppressor cells block T cell responses _via_ generation of reactive oxygen species. _Immunopharmacol. Immunotoxicol._ 37, 359–365 (2015). Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar  * Corzo, C.

A. et al. Mechanism regulating reactive oxygen species in tumor-induced myeloid-derived suppressor cells. _J. Immunol._ 182, 5693–5701 (2009). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  *

Kusmartsev, S. et al. Oxidative stress regulates expression of VEGFR1 in myeloid cells: link to tumor-induced immune suppression in renal cell carcinoma. _J. Immunol._ 181, 346–353 (2008).

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Jayaraman, P. et al. Tumor-expressed inducible nitric oxide synthase controls induction of functional myeloid-derived suppressor cells through

modulation of vascular endothelial growth factor release. _J. Immunol._ 188, 5365–5376 (2012). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Horikawa, N. et al. Expression of vascular endothelial

growth factor in ovarian cancer inhibits tumor immunity through the accumulation of myeloid-derived suppressor cells. _Clin. Cancer Res._ 23, 587–599 (2017). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google

Scholar  * Wang, T. et al. Regulation of the innate and adaptive immune responses by Stat-3 signaling in tumor cells. _Nat. Med._ 10, 48–54 (2004). Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar  *

Zhao, D. et al. VEGF drives cancer-initiating stem cells through VEGFR-2/Stat3 signaling to upregulate Myc and Sox2. _Oncogene_ 34, 3107–3119 (2015). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  *

Bartoli, M. et al. VEGF differentially activates STAT3 in microvascular endothelial cells. _Faseb. J._ 17, 1562–1564 (2003). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Niu, G. et al.

Constitutive Stat3 activity up-regulates VEGF expression and tumor angiogenesis. _Oncogene_ 21, 2000–2008 (2002). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Beury, D. W. et al. Myeloid-derived

suppressor cell survival and function are regulated by the transcription Factor Nrf2. _J. Immunol._ 196, 3470–3478 (2016). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Jian, S. L., et al.

Glycolysis regulates the expansion of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in tumor-bearing hosts through prevention of ROS-mediated apoptosis. _Cell Death Dis_. 8.

https://doi.org/10.1038/cddis.2017.192 (2017). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Kusmartsev, S. & Gabrilovich, D. I. Inhibition of myeloid cell differentiation in cancer: the role of

reactive oxygen species. _J. Leukoc. Biol._ 74, 186–196 (2003). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Raber, P. L. et al. Subpopulations of myeloid-derived suppressor cells impair T cell

responses through independent nitric oxide-related pathways. _Int. J. Cancer_ 134, 2853–2864 (2014). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Chun, K.-S. et al. Nitric oxide induces

expression of cyclooxygenase-2 in mouse skin through activation of NF-kappaB. _Carcinogenesis_ 25, 445–454 (2004). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Olson, N. & van der Vliet, A.

Interactions between nitric oxide and hypoxia-inducible factor signaling pathways in inflammatory disease. _Nitric Oxide_ 25, 125–137 (2012). Article  CAS  Google Scholar  * Park, J. Y.,

Pillinger, M. H. & Abramson, S. B. Prostaglandin E2 synthesis and secretion: The role of PGE2 synthases. _Clin. Immunol._ 119, 229–240 (2006). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  *

Obermajer, N. & Kalinski, P. Generation of myeloid-derived suppressor cells using prostaglandin E2. _Transplant. Res._ 1, 15 (2012). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar

  * Rodríguez-Ubreva, J. et al. Prostaglandin E2 Leads to the Acquisition of DNMT3A-Dependent Tolerogenic Functions in Human Myeloid-Derived Suppressor Cells. _Cell Rep._ 21, 154–167 (2017).

Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar  * Li, Y.-L., Zhao, H. & Ren, X.-B. Relationship of VEGF/VEGFR with immune and cancer cells: staggering or forward? _Cancer Biol. Med._ 13, 206–214

(2016). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar  * Nagaraj, S. et al. Altered recognition of antigen is a mechanism of CD8+T cell tolerance in cancer. _Nat. Med._ 13, 828–835

(2007). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Molon, B. et al. Chemokine nitration prevents intratumoral infiltration of antigen-specific T cells. _J. Exp. Med._ 208,

1949–1962 (2011). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Stiff, A. et al. Nitric oxide production by myeloid derived suppressor cells plays a role in impairing fc

receptor-mediated natural killer cell function. _Clin. Cancer Res._ 24, 1891–1904 (2018). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Youn, J.-I., Collazo, M., Shalova, I. N.,

Biswas, S. K. & Gabrilovich, D. I. Characterization of the nature of granulocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells in tumor-bearing mice. _J. Leukoc. Biol._ 91, 167–181 (2012). Article 

CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Rodriguez, P. C. et al. Arginase I-producing myeloid-derived suppressor cells in renal cell carcinoma are a subpopulation of activated

granulocytes. _Cancer Res._ 69, 1553–1560 (2009). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Rodríguez, P. C. & Ochoa, A. C. Arginine regulation by myeloid derived

suppressor cells and tolerance in cancer: mechanisms and therapeutic perspectives. _Immunol. Rev._ 222, 180–191 (2008). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Rodriguez, P. C. 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._ 64, 5839–5849

(2004). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Rodriguez, P. C. et al. Regulation of T cell receptor CD3zeta chain expression by L-arginine. _J. Biol. Chem._ 277, 21123–21129 (2002).

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Bian, Z. et al. Arginase-1 is neither constitutively expressed in nor required for myeloid-derived suppressor cell (MDSC)-mediated inhibition of T

cell proliferation. _Eur. J. Immunol._ 48, 1046–1058 (2018). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Bannai, S. Transport of cystine and cysteine in mammalian cells.

_Biochim. Biophys. Acta_ 779, 289–306 (1984). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Gmünder, H., Eck, H. P. & Dröge, W. Low membrane transport activity for cystine in resting and

mitogenically stimulated human lymphocyte preparations and human T cell clones. _Eur. J. Biochem._ 201, 113–117 (1991). Article  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Srivastava, M. K., Sinha, P.,

Clements, V. K., Rodriguez, P. & Ostrand-Rosenberg, S. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells inhibit T cell activation by depleting cystine and cysteine. _Cancer Res._ 70, 68–77 (2010).

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Ostrand-Rosenberg, S. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells: more mechanisms for inhibiting antitumor immunity. _Cancer Immunol. Immunother._ 59, 1593–1600

(2010). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * 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_ 6, e1320011 (2017). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Linnemann, C. _et_ _al_. Adenosine regulates CD8 T cell priming by inhibition of

membrane-proximal T cell receptor signalling. _Immunology_ 128. :https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2567.2009.03075.x (2009). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Hoskin, D. W.,

Mader, J. S., Furlong, S. J., Conrad, D. M. & Blay, J. Inhibition of T cell and natural killer cell function by adenosine and its contribution to immune evasion by tumor cells (review).

_Int. J. Oncol._ 32, 527–535 (2008). CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Zhang, Y. et al. Metformin-induced reduction of CD39 and CD73 blocks myeloid-derived suppressor cell activity in patients

with ovarian cancer. _Cancer Res._ 78, 1779–1791 (2018). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar  * Juneja, V. R. et al. PD-L1 on tumor cells is sufficient for immune evasion in

immunogenic tumors and inhibits CD8 T cell cytotoxicity. _J. Exp. Med._ 214, 895–904 (2017). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Teng, M. W. L., Ngiow, S. F., Ribas, A.

& Smyth, M. J. Classifying cancers based on T cell infiltration and PD-L1. _Cancer Res._ 75, 2139–2145 (2015). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Wargo, J. A.,

Reddy, S. M., Reuben, A. & Sharma, P. Monitoring immune responses in the tumor microenvironment. _Curr. Opin. Immunol._ 41, 23–31 (2016). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google

Scholar  * Yamauchi, Y. et al. Circulating and tumor myeloid-derived suppressor cells in resectable non-small-cell lung cancer. _Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care. Med._

https://doi.org/10.1164/rccm.201708-1707OC (2018). Article  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Lu, C., Redd, P. S., Lee, J. R., Savage, N. & Liu, K. The expression profiles and regulation of

PD-L1 in tumor-induced myeloid-derived suppressor cells. _Oncoimmunology_ 5, e1247135 (2016). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar  * Gebhardt, C. et al. Myeloid cells and

related chronic inflammatory factors as novel predictive markers in melanoma treatment with ipilimumab. _Clin. Cancer Res._ 21, 5453–5459 (2015). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  *

Sade-Feldman, M. et al. Clinical significance of circulating CD33+CD11b+HLA-DR- myeloid cells in patients with stage iv melanoma treated with ipilimumab. _Clin. Cancer Res._ 22, 5661–5672

(2016). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Iwata, T. et al. PD-L1+MDSCs are increased in HCC patients and induced by soluble factor in the tumor microenvironment. _Sci. Rep._ 6, 39296

(2016). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Villarino, A. V., Kanno, Y. & O’Shea, J. J. Mechanisms and consequences of Jak-STAT signaling in the immune system. _Nat.

Immunol._ 18, 374–384 (2017). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Pinton, L. et al. Activated T cells sustain myeloid-derived suppressor cell-mediated immune suppression. _Oncotarget_ 7,

1168–1184 (2016). PubMed  Google Scholar  * Trikha, P. & Carson, W. E. III Signaling pathways involved in MDSC regulation. _Biochim. Biophys. Acta_ 1846, 55–65 (2014). CAS  PubMed 

PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * 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._ 205, 2235–2249 (2008). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Sinha, P. et al. Proinflammatory S100 proteins regulate the accumulation of myeloid-derived

suppressor cells. _J. Immunol._ 181, 4666–4675 (2008). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Lim, J. W., Kim, H. & Kim, K. H. Nuclear factor-kappaB regulates cyclooxygenase-2

expression and cell proliferation in human gastric cancer cells. _Lab. Invest._ 81, 349–360 (2001). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Sinha, P., Clements, V. K., Fulton, A. M. &

Ostrand-Rosenberg, S. Prostaglandin E2 promotes tumor progression by inducing myeloid-derived suppressor cells. _Cancer Res._ 67, 4507–4513 (2007). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  *

Medina-Echeverz, J. et al. IFN-γ regulates survival and function of tumor-induced CD11b + Gr-1high myeloid derived suppressor cells by modulating the anti-apoptotic molecule Bcl2a1. _Eur. J.

Immunol._ 44, 2457–2467 (2014). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Gabrilovich, D. I. & Nagaraj, S. Myeloid-derived suppressor cells as regulators of the immune

system. _Nat_. _Rev_. _Immunol_. 9,162–174 (2009). * Liang, W. & Ferrara, N. The Complex role of neutrophils in tumor angiogenesis and metastasis. _Cancer Immunol. Res_ 4, 83–91 (2016).

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Elliott, L. A., Doherty, G. A., Sheahan, K. & Ryan, E. J. Human tumor-infiltrating myeloid cells: phenotypic and functional diversity. _Front.

Immunol._ 8, 86 (2017). Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar  * Youn, J.-I., Nagaraj, S., Collazo, M. & Gabrilovich, D. I. Subsets of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in

tumor-bearing mice. _J. Immunol._ 181, 5791–5802 (2008). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Zhou, J., Nefedova, Y., Lei, A. & Gabrilovich, D. Neutrophils and PMN-MDSC: their

biological role and interaction with stromal cells. _Semin. Immunol._ 35, 19–28 (2018). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Coffelt, S. B., Wellenstein, M. D. & de Visser, K. E.

Neutrophils in cancer: neutral no more. _Nat. Rev. Cancer_ 16, 431–446 (2016). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Fridlender, Z. G. et al. Transcriptomic analysis comparing

tumor-associated neutrophils with granulocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells and normal neutrophils. _PLoS ONE_ 7, e31524 (2012). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  *

Condamine, T. et al. Lectin-type oxidized LDL receptor-1 distinguishes population of human polymorphonuclear myeloid-derived suppressor cells in cancer patients. _Sci. Immunol._ 1, 8943–8943

(2016). Article  Google Scholar  * Sagiv, J. Y. et al. Phenotypic diversity and plasticity in circulating neutrophil subpopulations in cancer. _Cell Rep._ 10, 562–573 (2015). Article  CAS 

PubMed  Google Scholar  * Fleming, V. et al. Targeting myeloid-derived suppressor cells to bypass tumor-induced immunosuppression. _Front. Immunol._ 9, 398 (2018). Article  PubMed  PubMed

Central  CAS  Google Scholar  * Eriksson E., Wenthe J., Irenaeus S., Loskog A. & Ullenhag G. Gemcitabine reduces MDSCs, tregs and TGFβ-1 while restoring the teff/treg ratio in patients

with pancreatic cancer. _J. Transl. Med_. 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12967-016-1037-z (2016). * Weiss, J. M. et al. Regulatory T cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells in the tumor

microenvironment undergo fas-dependent cell death during IL-2/ CD40 therapy. _J. Immunol._ 192, 5821–5829 (2014). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Dang, Y. et al. TLR8

ligation induces apoptosis of monocytic myeloid-derived suppressor cells. _J. Leukoc. Biol._ 103, 157–164 (2018). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Kaneda, M. M. et al. PI3Kγ 3 is a

molecular switch that controls immune suppression. _Nature_ 539, 437–442 (2016). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Ali, K. et al. Inactivation of PI(3)K p110δ breaks

regulatory T cell-mediated immune tolerance to cancer. _Nature_ 510, 407–411 (2014). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Davis, R. J. 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._ 77, 2607–2619 (2017). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  *

Kwon, E. D. et al. Ipilimumab versus placebo after radiotherapy in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer that had progressed after docetaxel chemotherapy (CA184-043):

a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial. _Lancet Oncol._ 15, 700–712 (2014). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Lu, X. et al. Effective combinatorial

immunotherapy for castration-resistant prostate cancer. _Nature_ 543, 728–732 (2017). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Bill, M. A. et al. The small molecule curcumin

analog FLLL32 induces apoptosis in melanoma cells via STAT3 inhibition and retains the cellular response to cytokines with anti-tumor activity. _Mol. Cancer_ 9, 165 (2010). Article  PubMed 

PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar  * Ratner, M. Setback for JAK2 inhibitors. _Nat. Biotechnol._ 32, 119 (2014). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Melani, C., Sangaletti, S.,

Barazzetta, F. M., Werb, Z. & Colombo, M. P. Amino-biphosphonate-mediated MMP-9 inhibition breaks the tumor-bone marrow axis responsible for myeloid-derived suppressor cell expansion and

macrophage infiltration in tumor stroma. _Cancer Res._ 67, 11438–11446 (2007). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Overall, C. & Kleifeld, O. Tumour microenvironment

- opinion: validating matrix metalloproteinases as drug targets and anti-targets for cancer therapy. _Nat. Rev. Cancer_ 6, 227–239 (2006). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Santini,

D. et al. Pamidronate induces modifications of circulating angiogenetic factors in cancer patients. _Clin. Cancer Res._ 8, 1080–1084 (2002). CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Santini, D. et al.

Zoledronic acid induces significant and long-lasting modifications of circulating angiogenic factors in cancer patients. _Clin. Cancer Res._ 9, 2893–2897 (2003). CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar

  * Ferretti, G. et al. Zoledronic-acid-induced circulating level modifications of angiogenic factors, metalloproteinases and proinflammatory cytokines in metastatic breast cancer patients.

_Oncology_ 69, 35–43 (2005). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Nefedova, Y. et al. Mechanism of all-trans retinoic acid effect on tumor-associated myeloid-derived suppressor cells.

_Cancer Res._ 67, 11021–11028 (2007). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Iclozan, C., Antonia, S., Chiappori, A., Chen, D.-T. & Gabrilovich, D. Therapeutic regulation of

myeloid-derived suppressor cells and immune response to cancer vaccine in patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer. _Cancer Immunol. Immunother._ 62, 909–918 (2013). Article  CAS

  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  * Movahedi, K. et al. Identification of discrete tumor-induced myeloid-derived suppressor cell subpopulations with distinct T cell-suppressive

activity. _Blood_ 111, 4233–4244 (2008). Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar  * Bronte, V. et al. Recommendations for myeloid-derived suppressor cell nomenclature and characterization

standards. _Nat. Commun._ 7, 12150 (2016). Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar  Download references AUTHOR INFORMATION AUTHORS AND AFFILIATIONS * Skin Cancer Unit, German

Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany Christopher Groth, Xiaoying Hu, Rebekka Weber, Viktor Fleming, Peter Altevogt, Jochen Utikal & Viktor Umansky * Department of

Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, University Medical Center Mannheim, Ruprecht-Karl University of Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany Christopher Groth, Xiaoying Hu, Rebekka Weber, Viktor

Fleming, Peter Altevogt, Jochen Utikal & Viktor Umansky Authors * Christopher Groth View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Xiaoying Hu

View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Rebekka Weber View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar *

Viktor Fleming View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Peter Altevogt View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed 

Google Scholar * Jochen Utikal View author publications You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar * Viktor Umansky View author publications You can also search for this

author inPubMed Google Scholar CONTRIBUTIONS C.G.: writing, review, and revision of the manuscript, preparation and revision of figures. X.H.: preparation of the figures and revision of the

manuscript. R.W., V.F., P.A., and J.U.: review and revision of the manuscript. V.U.: writing, review, and revision of the manuscript and revision of the table and figure. CORRESPONDING

AUTHOR Correspondence to Viktor Umansky. ETHICS DECLARATIONS COMPETING INTERESTS The authors declare no competing interests. FUNDING This work was supported by grants from the German

research council (RTG2099 to R.W., J.U. and V.U.) and the DKFZ-MOST Cooperation in Cancer Research (CA181 to C.G. and V.U.). This work was kindly backed by the COST Action BM1404 Mye-EUNITER

(www.mye-euniter.eu). COST is supported by the EU Framework Program Horizon 2020. NOTE This work is published under the standard license to publish agreement. After 12 months the work will

become freely available and the license terms will switch to a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). RIGHTS AND PERMISSIONS This article is distributed under the terms

of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,

provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Reprints and permissions

ABOUT THIS ARTICLE CITE THIS ARTICLE Groth, C., Hu, X., Weber, R. _et al._ Immunosuppression mediated by myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) during tumour progression. _Br J Cancer_

120, 16–25 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-018-0333-1 Download citation * Received: 26 May 2018 * Revised: 18 October 2018 * Accepted: 23 October 2018 * Published: 09 November 2018 *

Issue Date: 08 January 2019 * DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-018-0333-1 SHARE THIS ARTICLE Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content: Get shareable link

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article. Copy to clipboard Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative