2021
DOI: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2021.09.033
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Considerations for the delivery of STING ligands in cancer immunotherapy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
24
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(24 citation statements)
references
References 110 publications
0
24
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This would be an appealing possibility, as direct STING agonists to date have either been limited by toxicity when given systemically or lacked systemic therapeutic effects in metastatic disease when administered intratumorally to a single lesion (72). Additionally, activity of STING agonists has been limited by degradation of cGAMP by extracellular phosphodiesterase and bell-shaped responses, where excessive concentrations of intratumoral STING agonist could lead to T cell apoptosis(73), PD-L1 overexpression on tumor cells and Tregs infiltration, resulting in a negative impact on anti-tumor immunotherapy(74, 75). In addition to this, we are also interested in whether immunotherapy could be synergized with cell damage agents and CD11b-agonists combinations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This would be an appealing possibility, as direct STING agonists to date have either been limited by toxicity when given systemically or lacked systemic therapeutic effects in metastatic disease when administered intratumorally to a single lesion (72). Additionally, activity of STING agonists has been limited by degradation of cGAMP by extracellular phosphodiesterase and bell-shaped responses, where excessive concentrations of intratumoral STING agonist could lead to T cell apoptosis(73), PD-L1 overexpression on tumor cells and Tregs infiltration, resulting in a negative impact on anti-tumor immunotherapy(74, 75). In addition to this, we are also interested in whether immunotherapy could be synergized with cell damage agents and CD11b-agonists combinations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Suppression of STING activation in pancreatic cancer cells enhanced tumor size by reducing the infiltration of immune cells [ 142 , 143 ]. In mouse model of the breast cancer, cGAMP reduced tumor burden [ 144 ] and liposomal delivery of cGAMP also activated STING in the macrophages [ 145 ]. In syngeneic ovarian cancer (ID8) and colon cancer (CT26), poly (ADPribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) increased IRF3 and STING activity [ 146 ].…”
Section: Cgas-sting Pathway and Pathologiesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, in addition to CDNs, various STING ligands have been developed and tested in pre-clinical and clinical trials [ 231 ]. The efficient delivery of STING ligands also requires nano-DDS, because they reach the cytosol with difficulty on their own [ 232 ]. We also encapsulated CDNs into a LNP composed of YSK12-C4, an ionizable lipid, and the treatment with the LNP caused elevated levels of serum type I IFN and induced an antitumor effect against lung metastasis [ 193 ].…”
Section: Innate Immunity ( Fig 3 )mentioning
confidence: 99%