Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

AACR logo

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Cancer Immunology Essentials
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Toolbox: Advanced Technologies for Antigen Identification
      • Toolbox: Coding and Computation
      • Toolbox: Signatures and Cells
      • "Best of" Collection
      • Editors' Picks
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Cancer Immunology Research
Cancer Immunology Research
  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Cancer Immunology Essentials
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Toolbox: Advanced Technologies for Antigen Identification
      • Toolbox: Coding and Computation
      • Toolbox: Signatures and Cells
      • "Best of" Collection
      • Editors' Picks
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

Research Articles

B cell–Derived IL35 Drives STAT3-Dependent CD8+ T-cell Exclusion in Pancreatic Cancer

Bhalchandra Mirlekar, Daniel Michaud, Samuel J. Lee, Nancy P. Kren, Cameron Harris, Kevin Greene, Emily C. Goldman, Gaorav P. Gupta, Ryan C. Fields, William G. Hawkins, David G. DeNardo, Naim U. Rashid, Jen Jen Yeh, Autumn J. McRee, Benjamin G. Vincent, Dario A.A. Vignali and Yuliya Pylayeva-Gupta
Bhalchandra Mirlekar
1Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel Michaud
2Department of Cell Biology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Samuel J. Lee
1Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Samuel J. Lee
Nancy P. Kren
1Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cameron Harris
1Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Kevin Greene
3Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Emily C. Goldman
4Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gaorav P. Gupta
1Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
4Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ryan C. Fields
5Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital and the Alvin J. Siteman Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
William G. Hawkins
5Department of Surgery, Barnes-Jewish Hospital and the Alvin J. Siteman Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
David G. DeNardo
6Department of Medicine, Barnes-Jewish Hospital and the Alvin J. Siteman Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Naim U. Rashid
1Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
7Department of Biostatistics, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jen Jen Yeh
1Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
8Department of Surgery, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Autumn J. McRee
1Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
9Department of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Benjamin G. Vincent
1Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
9Department of Medicine, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
10Department of Microbiology and Immunology, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dario A.A. Vignali
11Department of Immunology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Dario A.A. Vignali
Yuliya Pylayeva-Gupta
1Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
12Department of Genetics, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: yuliyap1@email.unc.edu
DOI: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-19-0349 Published March 2020
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Additional Files
  • Figure 1.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 1.

    IL35 mediates activation of STAT3, and suppression of IFNγ and chemotactic receptors CXCR3 and CCR5 in gp130+CD8+ T cells. A, Representative flow cytometry histograms (left) and quantification (right) of phospho(p)-STAT1, pSTAT3, and pSTAT4 in CD3+CD8+ T cells activated with anti-CD3 (1 μg/mL) and anti-CD28 (2 μg/mL) in the presence of OVA (2 μg/mL) with and without recombinant (r)IL35 (50 ng/mL). Proportion of CD8+ T cells is indicated. B, Representative flow cytometry plots and histograms (left) and quantification (right) of IFNγ production and expression of CXCR3 and CCR5 in CD3+CD8+ T cells activated as in A. C, Representative flow cytometry histograms (left) and quantification (right) of pSTAT1, pSTAT3, and pSTAT in CD3+CD8+ T cells sorted for IL12Rβ2+ or gp130+ subsets (single positive) activated as indicated in A. Proportion of CD8+ T cells is shown. D, Representative flow cytometry plots and histograms (left) and quantification (right) of IFNγ production and expression of CXCR3 and CCR5 in CD3+CD8+ T cells sorted for IL12Rβ2+ or gp130+ subsets (single positive) activated as indicated in A. Proportion of CD8+ T cells is shown. Error bars indicate SEM; P values were calculated using Student t test (unpaired, two-tailed); NS, not significant. *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001. Experiments were conducted using 6- to 8-week-old C57B6 mice with 6 mice per group in triplicate. Data represent three independent experiments.

  • Figure 2.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 2.

    STAT3 activation in CD8+ T cells is suppressive in vitro and in vivo. A, Representative flow cytometry plots and histograms of IFNγ production and expression of CXCR3, CCR5, phospho(p)-STAT1, pSTAT3, and pSTAT4 in CD3+CD8+ T cells stimulated with anti-CD3 (1 μg/mL) and anti-CD28 (2 μg/mL) in the presence of OVA (2 μg/mL), rIL35 (50 ng/mL), and/or STA-21 (20 μmol/L) inhibitor. Proportion of CD8+ T cells is indicated. B, Quantification of IFNγ production and expression of CXCR3, CCR5, pSTAT1, pSTAT3, and pSTAT4 in CD3+CD8+ T cells from A. C, Experimental schema used to test the role of Stat3 activation in CD8+ T cells. D, Quantification of tumor weight from CD45.1+ mice 3 weeks after orthotopic adoptive transfer of tumor-educated CD45.2+CD8+ T cells pretreated with anti-CD3/CD28 with and without STA-21 CD45.2+CD8+ T cells and injection with KPC cells (n = 6 mice/group). E, Numbers (no.) of adoptively transferred CD45.2+ (left) and endogenous CD45.1+ (right) tumor-infiltrating CD3+CD8+ T cells 3 weeks after orthotopic adoptive transfer to the CD45.1+ recipients indicated in D. F, Representative flow cytometry histograms (left) and quantification (right) of pSTAT1, pSTAT3, and pSTAT4 in intratumoral CD45.2+CD8+ T cells 3 weeks after orthotopic adoptive transfer to CD45.1+ recipients indicated in D. G, Representative flow cytometry plots and histograms (left) and quantification (right) of IFNγ production and expression of CXCR3 and CCR5 in intratumoral CD45.2+CD8+ T cells 3 weeks after orthotopic adoptive transfer to CD45.1+ recipients indicated in D. Error bars, SEM; P values were calculated using Student t test (unpaired, two-tailed); NS, not significant. **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001. Data represent three independent experiments.

  • Figure 3.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 3.

    B cell–derived IL35 promotes tumor growth and mediates suppression of IFNγ and chemotactic receptors CXCR3 and CCR5 in CD8+ T cells. A, Experimental schema used to generate tumor-bearing mixed bone marrow chimeras containing B cell–specific deletion of p35 (Bp35−/−) and corresponding control BWT mice. B, Quantification of tumor weight from BWT and Bp35−/− mice 3 weeks post-orthotopic injection with KPC4662 cells (n = 6 mice/group). C, Representative flow cytometry histograms (left) and quantification (right) of intracellular p35 expression in intratumoral and intrasplenic CD19+CD21hiCD5+CD1dhi Bregs from mice in B. Proportion of p35+ Bregs is indicated. D, Representative flow cytometry histograms (left) and quantification (right) of intratumoral CD45+CD3+CD4+CD25− effector T cells in BWT and Bp35−/− mice from B. E, Representative flow cytometry plots (left) and quantification (right) of intracellular IFNγ (isotype; rat IgG1, κ) and TNFα (isotype; rat IgG1, κ) expression by CD3+CD4+ intratumoral T cells from mice in B. Proportion of CD4+ T cells is indicated. F, Representative flow cytometry histograms (left) and quantification (right) of intratumoral CD3+CD4+Foxp3+ Tregs from mice in B. Proportion of CD4+ T cells is indicated. G, Representative flow cytometry histograms (left) and quantification (right) of intracellular p35 (isotype; rat IgG2a, ĸ) and IL10 (isotype; rat IgG2b, κ) expression by intratumoral CD3+CD4+ T cells from mice in B. H, Quantification of frequency of tumor-infiltrating CD45+CD3+CD8+ T cells from BWT and Bp35−/− mice from B determined by flow cytometry. I, Representative flow cytometry plots (left) and quantification (right) of IFNγ (isotype; rat IgG1, κ) in intratumoral CD45+CD3+CD8+ T cells from mice in B. J, Ratio of mean CD3+CD4+CD25− effector T cells (Teff) to Tregs (left) and ratio of mean CD3+CD8+ cytotoxic T cells to Tregs (right) were calculated on the basis of the percent-positive lymphocyte population determined by flow cytometry. Error bars, SEM; P values were calculated using Student t test (unpaired, two-tailed); NS, not significant. **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001. Data represent three independent experiments.

  • Figure 4.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 4.

    Production of IL35 by B cells impedes anti–PD-1 therapy. A, Experimental schema used to generate tumor-bearing mice that contain B cell–specific deletion of Ebi3 (BEbi3−/−) and corresponding control BEbi3+/− mice. B, Quantification of tumor weight from anti–PD-1–treated (200 μg) and IgG-treated (200 μg) BEbi3+/− and BEbi3−/− mice 3 weeks after orthotopic injection with KPC cells (n = 6 mice/group). C, Quantification of tumor growth by ultrasound from BEbi3+/− and BEbi3−/− mice from B. D, Quantification of frequency of tumor-infiltrating CD45+CD3+CD8+ T cells from BEbi3+/− and BEbi3−/− mice from B determined by flow cytometry. E, Representative flow cytometry plots of intratumoral CD45+CD3+CD8+ T cells stained for IFNγ (isotype; rat IgG1, κ) from mice in B. F, Quantification of intratumoral CD8+IFNγ+ T cells from all mice in B. G, Representative flow cytometry histograms (left) and quantification (right) of expression of CXCR3, CCR5, phospho(p)-STAT1, pSTAT3, and pSTAT4 in intratumoral CD3+CD8+ T cells isolated from BEbi3+/− and BEbi3−/− mice from B. H, Representative flow cytometry plots and histograms (left) and quantification (right) of IFNγ production and expression of CXCR3, CCR5, pSTAT1, pSTAT3, and pSTAT4 in CD3+CD8+ T cells 48 hours after coculture with Bregs in 1:1 ratio derived from the indicated mice. Experiment were done in triplicate with 6 mice per group. Error bars, SEM; P values were calculated using Student t test (unpaired, two-tailed); NS, not significant. *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001. Data represent three independent experiments.

  • Figure 5.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 5.

    IL35 blockade relieves immunosuppression of CD8+ T cells and synergizes with anti–PD-1. A, Schematic of the antibody treatment regimen. Anti-IL35 (200 μg first dose, followed by 100 μg/week) or control IgG antibody was administered in therapeutic schedule (1 week after tumor cell injection on days 7, 11, and 15). Administration of anti–PD-1 (200 μg) was initiated on day 7 after tumors reached approximately 4 to 5 mm in diameter. Two more doses of anti–PD-1 were administered on days 9 and 11. Mice were sacrificed 3 weeks after tumor cell injection or assessed for survival. B, Quantification of tumor weight from WT mice treated with therapeutic anti-IL35, anti–PD-1, or combination (as in A) 3 weeks after orthotopic injection with KPC cells (n = 6 mice/group). C, Quantification of tumor growth by ultrasound from WT mice in B. D, Survival plot of orthotopically injected WT mice from B treated with the indicated therapeutic antibodies. E, Quantification of tumor growth by ultrasound from spontaneous KPC mice treated with therapeutic anti-IL35, anti–PD-1, or combination as in A. Treatment was initiated when tumor measuring approximately 5 mm was visualized by ultrasound (n = 6 mice/group). Data represent three independent experiments. F, Quantification of frequency of orthotopic tumor-infiltrating CD45+CD3+CD8+ T cells from mice in B. G, Representative flow cytometry plots of intracellular IFNγ in intratumoral CD45+CD3+CD8+ T cells from the mice in B. Proportion of CD8+ T cells is indicated. H, Quantification of intratumoral CD8+IFNγ+ T cells from the mice in B. I, Quantification of CXCR3, CCR5, pSTAT3, and pSTAT4 expression in intratumoral CD3+CD8+ T cells from mice in B. Error bars, SEM; P values were calculated using Student t test (unpaired, two-tailed); NS, not significant. *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001. Data represent three independent experiments.

  • Figure 6.
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure 6.

    Identification of IL35-producing B cells in patients with PDA. A, Quantification of CD19+CD24hiCD38hi B cells in peripheral blood of healthy volunteers (n = 30) and treatment-naïve PDA patients (n = 30). Proportion of CD19+ cells is indicated. B, Fold change in Il10, p35, and Ebi3 from sorted CD19+CD24hiCD38hi Bregs or CD19+CD24loCD38lo Bcon cells from healthy volunteers or patients with PDA (n = 5 samples/B-cell group) determined by qPCR. Fold change determined by comparing with healthy Bcon cells. C, Fold change in expression of Il10, p35, and Ebi3 from sorted CD19+CD24hiCD38hi Bregs in healthy donors or patients with PDA determined by qPCR. D, Representative immunofluorescence staining for CD8, CXCR3, and pSTAT3 in samples of human PDA. Arrow, pSTAT3+CD8+ T cells; arrowhead, pSTAT3−CD8+ T cells; and asterisks, pSTAT3+CD8− cells. Scale bars, 25 μm. E, Proportion of Ebi3-high and -low tumor regions as a function of immune aggregates (IA). Data were derived from counting 3 to 6 field-of-view (FOV)/tumor sample (n = 11 tumor samples). F, Proportion of pSTAT3+CD8+ T cells as function of low versus high numbers of Ebi3+ immune cells. Each data point is the percentage of pSTAT3+CD8+ T cells out of all CD8+ T cells/20× FOV. Data were derived from counting 3 to 6 FOV/tumor sample (n = 11 tumor samples). G, Proportion of CXCR3+CD8+ T cells as function of low versus high numbers of Ebi3+ immune cells. Each data point is the percentage of CXCR3+CD8+ T cells out of all CD8+ T cells/20x FOV. Data were derived from counting 3 to 6 FOV/tumor sample (n = 11 tumor samples). H, Proportion of CXCR3+CD8+ T cells as function of pSTAT3+ versus pSTAT3− in tumor regions high for Ebi3+ immune cells. Each data point is the percentage of CXCR3+CD8+ T cells out of all CD8+ T cells/20× FOV. Data were derived from counting 3 to 6 FOV/tumor sample (n = 11 tumor samples). I, Correlation of the cancer Breg signature with the cytotoxic CD8+ T-cell index in PAAD from TCGA. J, Correlation of the cancer Breg signature with the cytotoxic CD8+ T-cell index across TCGA subtypes. Error bars, SEM; P values were calculated using Student t test (unpaired, two-tailed). *, P < 0.05; **, P < 0.01; ***, P < 0.001. Data represent three independent experiments.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Supplementary Data

    • Supplementary Tables - Supplementary Tables 1-3
    • Supplementary Figures - Supplementary Figures 1-14
PreviousNext
Back to top
Cancer Immunology Research: 8 (3)
March 2020
Volume 8, Issue 3
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Editorial Board (PDF)

Sign up for alerts

View this article with LENS

Open full page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Cancer Immunology Research article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
B cell–Derived IL35 Drives STAT3-Dependent CD8+ T-cell Exclusion in Pancreatic Cancer
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Cancer Immunology Research
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Cancer Immunology Research.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
B cell–Derived IL35 Drives STAT3-Dependent CD8+ T-cell Exclusion in Pancreatic Cancer
Bhalchandra Mirlekar, Daniel Michaud, Samuel J. Lee, Nancy P. Kren, Cameron Harris, Kevin Greene, Emily C. Goldman, Gaorav P. Gupta, Ryan C. Fields, William G. Hawkins, David G. DeNardo, Naim U. Rashid, Jen Jen Yeh, Autumn J. McRee, Benjamin G. Vincent, Dario A.A. Vignali and Yuliya Pylayeva-Gupta
Cancer Immunol Res March 1 2020 (8) (3) 292-308; DOI: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-19-0349

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
B cell–Derived IL35 Drives STAT3-Dependent CD8+ T-cell Exclusion in Pancreatic Cancer
Bhalchandra Mirlekar, Daniel Michaud, Samuel J. Lee, Nancy P. Kren, Cameron Harris, Kevin Greene, Emily C. Goldman, Gaorav P. Gupta, Ryan C. Fields, William G. Hawkins, David G. DeNardo, Naim U. Rashid, Jen Jen Yeh, Autumn J. McRee, Benjamin G. Vincent, Dario A.A. Vignali and Yuliya Pylayeva-Gupta
Cancer Immunol Res March 1 2020 (8) (3) 292-308; DOI: 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-19-0349
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
    • Authors' Contributions
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • CAR Tonic Signaling
  • DGKA Mediates Resistance to Anti–PD-1 Therapy
  • Boosting Eomes Expression Augments Antitumor Immunity
Show more Research Articles
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Privacy Policy
Facebook   Twitter   LinkedIn   YouTube   RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Cancer Immunology Essentials

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians

About Cancer Immunology Research

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2021 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Cancer Immunology Research
eISSN: 2326-6074
ISSN: 2326-6066

Advertisement