Understanding how the immune system affects cancer development and progression has been one of the most challenging questions in immunology. Research over the past two decades has helped explain why the answer to this question has evaded us for so long. We now appreciate that the immune system plays a dual role in cancer: It can not only suppress tumor growth by destroying cancer cells or inhibiting their outgrowth but also promote tumor progression either by selecting for tumor cells that are more fit to survive in an immunocompetent host or by establishing conditions within the tumor microenvironment that facilitate tumor outgrowth. Here, we discuss a unifying conceptual framework called "cancer immunoediting," which integrates the immune system's dual host-protective and tumor-promoting roles.

The clinical relevance of T cells in the control of a diverse set of human cancers is now beyond doubt. However, the nature of the antigens that allow the immune system to distinguish cancer cells from noncancer cells has long remained obscure. Recent technological innovations have made it possible to dissect the immune response to patient-specific neoantigens that arise as a consequence of tumor-specific mutations, and emerging data suggest that recognition of such neoantigens is a major factor in the activity of clinical immunotherapies. These observations indicate that neoantigen load may form a biomarker in cancer immunotherapy and provide an incentive for the development of novel therapeutic approaches that selectively enhance T cell reactivity against this class of antigens.

The concept that the immune system can recognize and destroy nascent transformed cells was originally embodied in the cancer immunosurveillance hypothesis of Burnet and Thomas. This hypothesis was abandoned shortly afterwards because of the absence of strong experimental evidence supporting the concept. New data, however, clearly show the existence of cancer immunosurveillance and also indicate that it may function as a component of a more general process of cancer immunoediting. This process is responsible for both eliminating tumors and sculpting the immunogenic phenotypes of tumors that eventually form in immunocompetent hosts. In this review, we will summarize the historical and experimental basis of cancer immunoediting and discuss its dual roles in promoting host protection against cancer and facilitating tumor escape from immune destruction.

Interferons play key roles in mediating antiviral and antigrowth responses and in modulating immune response. The main signaling pathways are rapid and direct. They involve tyrosine phosphorylation and activation of signal transducers and activators of transcription factors by Janus tyrosine kinases at the cell membrane, followed by release of signal transducers and activators of transcription and their migration to the nucleus, where they induce the expression of the many gene products that determine the responses. Ancillary pathways are also activated by the interferons, but their effects on cell physiology are less clear. The Janus kinases and signal transducers and activators of transcription, and many of the interferon-induced proteins, play important alternative roles in cells, raising interesting questions as to how the responses to the interferons intersect with more general aspects of cellular physiology and how the specificity of cytokine responses is maintained. CONTENTS

Failure of T cells to protect against cancer is thought to result from lack of antigen recognition, chronic activation, and/or suppression by other cells. Using a mouse sarcoma model, we show that glucose consumption by tumors metabolically restricts T cells, leading to their dampened mTOR activity, glycolytic capacity, and IFN-γ production, thereby allowing tumor progression. We show that enhancing glycolysis in an antigenic ‘regressor’ tumor is sufficient to override the protective ability of T cells to control tumor growth. We also show that checkpoint blockade antibodies against CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1, which are used clinically, restore glucose in tumors, permitting T cell glycolysis and IFN-γ production. Furthermore, we found that blocking PD-L1 directly on tumors dampens glycolysis by inhibiting mTOR activity and decreasing expression of glycolysis enzymes, reflecting a role for PD-L1 in tumor glucose utilization. Our results establish that tumor-imposed metabolic restrictions can mediate T cell hyporesponsiveness during cancer.