The clinical successes in immunotherapy have been both astounding and at the same time unsatisfactory. Countless patients with varied tumor types have seen pronounced clinical response with immunotherapeutic intervention; however, many more patients have experienced minimal or no clinical benefit when provided the same treatment. As technology has advanced, so has the understanding of the complexity and diversity of the immune context of the tumor microenvironment and its influence on response to therapy. It has been possible to identify different subclasses of immune environment that have an influence on tumor initiation and response and therapy; by parsing the unique classes and subclasses of tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) that exist within a patient’s tumor, the ability to predict and guide immunotherapeutic responsiveness will improve, and new therapeutic targets will be revealed.

No abstract

Highlights d cDC2 initiate activation but not differentiation of antitumor CD4 + T conv d T reg depletion relieves cDC2 suppression driving antitumor CD4 + T conv differentiation d Human equivalent of mouse cDC2 are present in the tumor and draining lymph node d The balance of human cDC2/T reg in the TME dictates T cell quality and prognosis

Genetically engineered mouse models (GEMMs) have contributed significantly to the field of cancer research. In contrast to cancer cell inoculation models, GEMMs develop de novo tumors in a natural immune‐proficient microenvironment. Tumors arising in advanced GEMMs closely mimic the histopathological and molecular features of their human counterparts, display genetic heterogeneity, and are able to spontaneously progress toward metastatic disease. As such, GEMMs are generally superior to cancer cell inoculation models, which show no or limited heterogeneity and are often metastatic from the start. Given that GEMMs capture both tumor cell‐intrinsic and cell‐extrinsic factors that drive de novo tumor initiation and progression toward metastatic disease, these models are indispensable for preclinical research. GEMMs have successfully been used to validate candidate cancer genes and drug targets, assess therapy efficacy, dissect the impact of the tumor microenvironment, and evaluate mechanisms of drug resistance. In vivo validation of candidate cancer genes and therapeutic targets is further accelerated by recent advances in genetic engineering that enable fast‐track generation and fine‐tuning of GEMMs to more closely resemble human patients. In addition, aligning preclinical tumor intervention studies in advanced GEMMs with clinical studies in patients is expected to accelerate the development of novel therapeutic strategies and their translation into the clinic.