CD8+ T cells are the key executioners of the adaptive immune arm, which mediates antitumor and antiviral immunity. Naïve CD8+ T cells develop in the thymus and are quickly activated in the periphery after encountering a cognate antigen, which induces these cells to proliferate and differentiate into effector cells that fight the initial infection. Simultaneously, a fraction of these cells become long-lived memory CD8+ T cells that combat future infections. Notably, the generation and maintenance of memory cells is profoundly affected by various in vivo conditions, such as the mode of primary activation (e.g., acute vs. chronic immunization) or fluctuations in host metabolic, inflammatory, or aging factors. Therefore, many T cells may be lost or become exhausted and no longer functional. Complicated intracellular signaling pathways, transcription factors, epigenetic modifications, and metabolic processes are involved in this process. Therefore, understanding the cellular and molecular basis for the generation and fate of memory and exhausted CD8+ cells is central for harnessing cellular immunity. In this review, we focus on mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), particularly signaling mediated by mTOR complex (mTORC) 2 in memory and exhausted CD8+ T cells at the molecular level.
CD8+ T cells, commonly known as cytotoxic T lymphocytes, are critical for immune system-mediated defense against pathogens, including viruses and bacteria, as well as for tumor cell surveillance. In an acute infection, antigen-specific naïve CD8+ T cells are activated and differentiate into effector cells. After antigen clearance, 5–10% of these effector T cells become memory cells, which provide more robust and long-term protection against previously encountered pathogens . However, in cancer and chronic infections where antigens persist, CD8+ T cells progressively differentiate toward a dysfunctional state of exhaustion . An increasing number of studies have revealed that the pools of memory and exhausted CD8+ T cells are heterogeneous and comprise distinct subsets that vary in terms of their phenotype, function, and location within the body [3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13]. This heterogeneity reflects the complex nature of the immune system and the need for diverse and specialized immune cells to effectively respond to a wide range of pathogens and environmental challenges. However, our understanding of the molecular mechanisms and signaling pathways regulating the fate determination of CD8+ T cells is not yet complete.
The mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) was discovered in 1975 after rapamycin was isolated from Streptomyces hygroscopicus, a soil bacterium on Easter Island [14, 15]. mTOR signaling regulates a variety of cellular and molecular functions, including protein synthesis, cell growth and proliferation, autophagy, metabolism, and gene expression [16,17,18,19]. There are two distinct complexes of mTOR, mTOR complex (mTORC)1 and mTORC2, which share certain components, including the core kinase mTOR, mLST8 (also known as GβL), and DEPTOR . However, each complex consists of unique components that contribute to its distinct functions and downstream signaling pathways. For example, regulatory-associated protein of mTOR (Raptor) is a specific component of mTORC1, while rapamycin-insensitive companion of TOR (Rictor) and Sty1/Spc1-interacting protein 1 (Sin1) are specific to mTORC2 [17, 20] (Fig. 1). mTORC1 is sensitive to rapamycin, and its activity is rapidly inhibited upon rapamycin treatment . In contrast, mTORC2 is relatively resistant to rapamycin, and its activity is modestly inhibited after prolonged periods of treatment . mTORC1 primarily regulates cell growth and metabolism, while mTORC2 is involved in cell survival and cytoskeletal organization . In T cells, mTOR is activated by various signals, including growth factors, cytokines, T-cell receptor (TCR) stimulation, costimulatory signals, nutrient availability, and cellular energy status  (Fig. 1). Our previous studies showed that the Sin1 component of mTORC2 plays a critical role in various phases of T-cell functional maturation, including T-cell development, cytokine production, and immune niche regulation [24,25,26]. Overall, by functioning as a central hub that coordinates multiple signaling pathways, mTOR plays a critical role in regulating various aspects of T-cell function, including T-cell development, activation, differentiation, migration, survival, memory formation, and exhaustion. As the role of mTOR in regulating T-cell function has been previously discussed in multiple high-quality reviews [23, 27], this review focuses mainly on the Sin1/mTORC2 complex-mediated regulation of CD8+ T-cell fate decisions and the most recent studies that have reported previously unknown roles for mTOR signaling in T-cell memory and exhaustion generation.
Heterogeneity and cell-fate decisions in effector and memory subsets
During acute infection or vaccination, after priming by antigen-presenting cells in secondary organs, including the spleen and lymph nodes, antigen-experienced CD8+ T cells in the effector phase differentiate into two subsets with distinct features: the majority of these CD8+ T cells (~90–95%), termed short-lived effector cells (SLECs), are marked by high expression of CX3CR1 and KLRG1 and low expression of IL-7Ralpha (CD127) and the ability to actively clear virus-infected or transformed cells by secreting high amounts of perforin, granzyme and cytokines. The other CD8+ T cells (~5–10%), termed memory precursor effector cells (MPECs), are marked by low expression of CX3CR1 and KLRG1 and high expression of CD127 and are thought to give rise to the majority of memory T cells in the memory phase [28, 29] (Fig. 2A). Although MPECs exhibit several memory T-cell features, including high secretion of IL-2 after restimulation and high dependence on the memory/naïve T-associated transcription factor (TF) TCF-1 [28, 30, 31], MPECs and SLECs show comparable cytotoxic effector function . During the initial expansion of CD8+ T cells, factors including TCR signals [33, 34], costimulatory/inhibitory molecules  and cytokines within the inflammatory environment [1, 36, 37] dictate the direction of SLEC/MPEC differentiation. TFs activated in each subset, including ZEB2, BLIMP1, and ID2 in SLEC [38,39,40] and ID3, FOXO1, and TCF-1 in MPECs [40, 41], contribute to the maintenance of subset identity in part by suppressing the expression of genes associated with the other subset.
When an antigen is cleared (the effector phase ends), most SLECs undergo apoptosis, but a small percentage of them survive to become long-lived effector cells (LLEs), which express high levels of CX3CR1 and KLRG1, intermediate levels of CD127 and low levels of Eomes during the memory phase [42, 43] (Fig. 2A). Despite inferior expansion ability after bacteria/virus rechallenge, these cells show superior clearance effectiveness of certain antigens by secreting cytolytic molecules, including GZMB and perforin [42, 43]. MPECs, on the other hand, differentiate into effector memory T cells (Tem), central memory T (Tcm) and residential memory T (Trm) cells [44,45,46] (Fig. 2A). Although high expression of CCR7 and CD62L enables Tcm cells to preferably localize to lymphoid tissues, lack of CCR7 and CD62L expression promotes Tem cells to take up residence in nonlymphoid tissues where they can be rapidly mobilized to sites of infection [47,48,49]. Tem cells, which also exhibit an immediate level of CX3CR1 expression and lack CD62L, shows better cytotoxic effector function but lower proliferative capacity than Tcm cells [50, 51]. Furthermore, a specific type of T-cell known as “T memory stem (Tscm) cells” is found in both human and mouse immune systems . Tscm and Tcm cells both show high potential for self-renewal and produce Tem and effector cells after restimulation. However, Tscm cells are the least differentiated and thus the most immature memory T-cell subset and exhibit the highest self-renewal capacity . They express high levels of CD95, CD122, and CD127 but do not express markers, such as CD27 and CD28, associated with effector and memory T-cell subsets .
To function in local immune defense and confer immediate protection against pathogenic infections at the site of initial infection, Trm cells are formed in peripheral tissues, such as skin, gut, lung, and other mucosal tissues, where they provide long-term protection against pathogenic infections. Although the true precursors of Trm cells are still under investigation, a fraction of KLRG1- CD8+ T cells (presumably MPECs [53,54,55,56,57]) infiltrate tissues through chemokine–chemokine receptor interactions (such as the CXCL9/CXCL10–CXCR3 interaction) and form Trm cells . Locally released cytokines, including IL-15, further upregulate the TF Hobit (Zfp683), which in synergy with Blimp1 controls a universal tissue-residency program and represses tissue-egressing genes, including S1PR1, CCR7 and KLF2, thereby promoting the formation of Trm cells . A recent study, however, showed that at the protein level, the TFs BLIMP1 and ID3 controlled distinct Trm cell subsets within the small intestine: BLIMP1hi Trm cells exhibit signatures consistent with SLECs (high KLRG1 and GZMB expression), and ID3hi Trm cells exhibit signatures consistent with MPECs (high BCL2 and CD127 expression); this observation makes sense because the Blimp1hi Trm cell population peaks early, while the number of ID3hi Trm cells gradually increases after infection . CD69 and CD103, two classic markers of Trm cells, are expressed at different levels in the two aforementioned Trm cell subsets . In addition to intraorgan heterogeneity, Trm cells from different organs exhibit various levels of CD69 and CD103 expression , further suggesting interorgan heterogeneity. Indeed, the heterogeneity of Trm cells at the transcriptome/epigenome levels among tissues has been consistently observed [61,62,63]. Maintenance of these expression patterns by TGF-β signaling, which had been previously thought to be crucial for all Trm cells [58, 64, 65], is required only for Trm cells in the small intestine, salivary gland and skin, while Trm cells within fat tissue, kidney and liver are largely unaffected by the loss of TGF-β signaling [61, 63].
Cellular and molecular mechanisms underlying T-cell exhaustion
Notably, during chronic infection or tumorigenesis, antigen-specific CD8+ T cells fail to transit into functional memory T cells. Unresolved chronic antigen stimulation altered costimulatory and coinhibitory signaling, and chronic inflammation cause CD8+ T cells to undergo a unique differentiation process commonly known as T-cell exhaustion [66,67,68]. T-cell exhaustion is characterized by progressive loss of effector function, including cytotoxicity and cytokine production ability. For example, exhausted cells have been reported to produce lower levels of cytokines, including IL-2, tumor necrosis factor (TNF), and interferon gamma (IFN-γ), and fewer cytotoxic effector molecules, including perforin and granzymes . Another key feature of T-cell exhaustion is the evaluated expression of multiple inhibitory receptors (IRs), including PD1, TIM3, CTLA-4, LAG3, TIGIT, CD160, BTLA, and 2B4 (CD244) . Notably, using monoclonal antibodies that target IRs to enhance T-cell function has been shown to be a promising treatment for cancer patients.
Persistent T-cell exposure to antigens is critical in driving T-cell exhaustion and is a key condition induced by various chronic infections and cancers both in model mice and humans . Both high antigen levels and long-term antigen persistence drive T-cell exhaustion. Previous studies revealed that infections associated with high levels of persistence viremia, including viremia induced by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), hepatitis B virus (HBV), and mouse lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), induce more severe T-cell dysfunction [70,71,72,73]. In contrast, infections such as cytomegalovirus (CMV) and Epstein–Barr virus (EBV), which induce chronic infection but low levels of viremia, have been shown to induce an intermediate rate of T-cell dysfunction . In HIV patients, restored functional antiviral CD8+ T cells are found when viral levels decline after successful antiretroviral therapy (ART) [75, 76]. Furthermore, antigen at high levels has been reported to directly drive T-cell exhaustion during chronic infection and is not a consequence of T-cell exhaustion . In addition to antigen load, sustained antigen exposure leads to T-cell exhaustion. Acute viral infections that resolve in a short period leads to the initiation of strong effector and durable memory responses. However, antigen-specific CD8+ T cells adoptively transferred from the late phase of chronic infection to uninfected mice failed to develop into fully functional cytotoxic T cells (CTLs) or memory T cells [78, 79]. Indeed, long-term antigen exposure irreversibly modifies the metabolic, transcriptional, and epigenetic programs underlying T-cell function [80,81,82].
Decreased costimulatory and increased coinhibitory signals promote T-cell exhaustion. As discussed above, exhausted CD8+ T cells express multiple IRs at persistent levels, and ligands related to these IRs are upregulated on antigen-presenting cells (APCs), tumor cells, and nonimmune cells during chronic infections and in cancer. Notably, PD-1 is transiently upregulated during T-cell activation and is required for memory formation . In the contexts of chronic infections and cancer, the expression of PD-1 is maintained at high levels on exhausted cells, which suppresses their effector function. Mechanistically, after PD-1 and PD-L1 ligation, SHP-2 is activated and dampens signaling pathway activation induced after TCR and CD28 stimulation [84, 85]. Although the PD-1 pathway is a critical mediator of T-cell exhaustion, some studies reported that exhausted T (Tex) cells are developed under PD-1-abrogated conditions, indicating that PD-1 does not directly cause T-cell exhaustion . Furthermore, PD-1−/− CD8+ T cells exhibit a tendency to undergo more pronounced exhaustion . These reports suggest that TCR stimulation is the major cause of T-cell exhaustion and that PD-1 deficiency results in stronger TCR signaling that drives a more severe exhaustion phenotype. In addition to PD-1, other IRs, such as Lag-3, CD160, Tim-3, CTLA-4, and TIGHT, have all been shown to suppress T-cell function and are highly expressed by exhausted CD8+ T cells . The CD28 pathway is an essential costimulatory pathway in CD8+ T cells, and CD28 ligand binding reduces the TCR signaling threshold required for T-cell activation . CD28 signaling is impaired in cases of chronic infection and cancer . PD-1 dephosphorylates CD28, and CD28 stimulation is essential for potent anti-PD-1 therapy during chronic viral infection in mice . In addition to dephosphorylation by PD-1, CTLA-4 at high levels in the chronic infection or cancer context competes for the ligands of CD28, namely, B7 family receptors, thereby diminishing CD28 signaling .
During acute viral infection, a proinflammatory environment is required for both the generation and function of effector CD8+ T cells, while memory cell formation requires a less pronounced proinflammatory environment . However, a highly proinflammatory environment in the context of chronic infection or cancer can result in the induction of suppressive cytokines that promote T-cell exhaustion. Type I interferons are antiviral cytokines, but IFN-α/β at elevated levels has been reported to prompt the expression of negative regulators such as IL-10 and PD-L1, which promote T-cell exhaustion . IL-10 and TGF-β are abundance in cases of chronic infections or cancer, and attenuation of IL-10 and TGF-β signaling contributes to the prevention and reversal of T-cell exhaustion [90,91,92].
T-cell exhaustion is associated with an altered metabolic program. During chronic infection, IRs induce signaling events that suppress Akt activation and mTOR activity in Tex cells, which leads to reduced glucose uptake, repressed cellular respiration, and dysregulated mitochondrial energetics . In the tumor microenvironment, tumor cells compete with immune cells for fuel sources, such as glucose and oxygen, which may contribute to the metabolic reprogramming of T cells and promote their exhaustion . Furthermore, distinct transcriptional and epigenetic programs are acquired during the development of T-cell exhaustion . Overall, Tex cells constitute a unique CD8+ subset that phenotypically and mechanistically differ from the effector and memory CD8+ T cells that are generated during acute infection.
The diversity of the mechanisms that lead to T-cell exhaustion highlights the challenge of developing therapeutic strategies. Specifically, the optimal combination therapies might target different signaling pathways to achieve better and more durable clinical outcomes in the treatment of chronic infection and cancer.
Heterogeneity and differentiation trajectories of exhausted CD8+ T cells
Previously, antigen-specific CD8+ T cells during chronic infection and cancer were collectively termed Tex cells. Recently, multiple studies have shown that the pool of exhausted CD8+ T cells is heterogeneous and comprises several phenotypically and functionally distinct subsets. During the onset of chronic infection or tumor growth, although some antigen-experienced activated CD8+ T cells exhibit features of early effectors (KLRG1HiCX3CR1+PD-1loTCF-1lo), the others become progenitor exhausted T cells (progenitor Tex cells) marked by high expression of Ly108, intermediate level expression of PD-1 and low expression of CX3CR1 and KLRG1 [3, 95]. Governed by the master TF TCF-1, progenitor Tex cells are quiescent but show the highest capacity to proliferate and give rise to other Tex cell subsets [4, 7, 8, 96, 97]. These unique features enable progenitor Tex cells to expand robustly during immunotherapy treatment [5, 7]. In accordance with the role of TCF-1 in establishing progenitor Tex cells, loss of this TF leads to the abrogation of the exhausted T-cell lineage, with the formation of the aforementioned early effector cells largely unaffected . Recent studies based on single-cell technologies have revealed functional and spatial heterogeneity within the progenitor Tex cell subset: in chronic infections, a precursor subset marked by high expression of CD62L  or CD69  is thought to give rise to progenitor Tex cells, while stem-like CD8+ T cells residing in draining lymph nodes may be precursors of progenitor Tex cells in the tumor microenvironment [100,101,102] (Fig. 2B).
At later stages of chronic infection or tumor growth, when CD4+ T-cell help is lost, continuous TCR signaling activates several downstream TFs, including TOX [10, 103, 104], NR4A [105, 106], NFAT [107, 108] and IRF4 , which in conjunction boost the differentiation of progenitor Tex cells into Tex cells. Gradually increased expression of inhibitory receptors, including PD-1, TIM-3 and CD101, is typical during this process [9, 110]. However, facilitated by CD4+ T-cell action (mainly their secretion of IL-21), progenitor Tex cells differentiate into a subset that exhibits higher cytotoxicity and cytokine production ability (denoted as CX3CR1+ effector T cells) [13, 111, 112]. This subset mirrors to some extent the SLEC subset that appears during acute infection due to their high expression of CX3CR1, KLRG1 and the TF T-bet [12, 13, 113]. Higher activity of the TF BATF in this cell subset is thought to maintain the cytotoxic program by direct binding to the Tbx21 (encodes T-bet) and Klf2 gene loci  (Fig. 2B).
Transcriptional and epigenetic regulation of T-cell exhaustion
T-bet and Eomes both belong to the T-box TF family. In cases of acute infection, T-bet drives CTL differentiation, while Eomes promotes memory T-cell development . During chronic infection, these two TFs are both needed to maintain the antigen-specific T-cell pool . T-bet is specifically needed for CX3CR1+ effector T-cell formation in the chronic infection context . However, Eomes plays a more complex role in regulating effector- and exhaustion-related genes; notably, it coordinates with T-bet to mediate functional effector differentiation, but it expressed at the highest level in terminally exhausted cells and promotes T-cell exhaustion in cases of chronic infection and cancer [13, 95, 115].
TCF-1 is critical for establishing CD8+ T-cell identity during T-cell development  and promotes the memory CD8+ T-cell response during acute infection [31, 117]. Importantly, TCF-1+ CD8+ T cells are progenitor Tex cells during chronic infection and cancer, and they survive long term, undergo self-renewal and retain the potential to produce differentiated cell subsets . Similar to its role in programming memory cells after acute infection, TCF-1 has been reported to suppress effector cell differentiation during the early stage of chronic infection, possibly by promoting the expression of Eomes, which antagonizes the activity of T-bet and thus regulates the formation of progenitor cells .
Sustained expression of FOXO1 maintains T cells in a quiescent state, which is required for memory formation in the context of acute viral infection [41, 118], progenitor Tex cell in the context of chronic viral infection , and acquisition of the senescent phenotype by naïve T cells during aging . The mechanism is, in part, constituted by direct FOXO1 binding and suppressing AP-1 TFs, which are key regulators of effector programs . Moreover, FOXO1 drives the expression of TCF-1, a regulator central to memory programming in CD8+ T cells . Furthermore, FOXO1 has been reported to control T-cell trafficking by directly inducing the expression of chemokine receptors such as CCR7 and S1P1 or by inducing KLF2 expression, which subsequently regulates the expression of CD62L and S1PR1 .
TOX is not required for the formation of effector or memory cells during acute infection . Notably, several groups have reported that TOX is selectively upregulated during chronic infection and in cancer, and it transcriptionally and epigenetically programs T cells to undergo exhaustion . The induction of TOX activity requires calcium signaling and NFAT2 , the activation of which is initially induced via prolonged TCR stimulation.
NR4A TF family members are located downstream of the TCR signaling pathway and are known to play a key role during thymocyte selection. The three TFs that constitute this family, NR4A1, NR4A2, and NR4A3, exhibit redundancy . NR4A TFs have been reported to program CD8+ T-cell exhaustion in cases of chronic infection and cancer. A recent study further defined a role for TOX and the NR4A TF, which form a transcriptional network that mediates CD8+ T-cell exhaustion . They act downstream of NFAT and form a feedback loop in which TOX and NR4A positively regulate each other to induce the transcriptional program that leads to T-cell exhaustion .
Epigenetic profiling revealed several fundamental discoveries of T-cell exhaustion. First, differentiation programs in exhausted CD8+ T cells are epigenetically imprinted after these cells are primed [123, 124]. The programs can be transiently reinvigorated, such as via PD-1 blockade, but fixed epigenetic landscapes irrevocably commit T cells to exhaustion . Furthermore, a particular epigenetic landscape of Tex cells contributes to the unique TF networks and gene expression patterns of T-cell exhaustion [82, 125]. Some studies have attempted to epigenetically reprogram Tex cells. For example, immune functions were reestablished after diacetylated histone H3 levels were restored using a histone deacetylase inhibitor . In addition, blocking de novo methylation-enhanced PD-1 blockade mediated T-cell reinvigoration . These findings suggest that better clinical outcomes for T-cell-based immune therapies may be achieved by manipulating epigenetic programs (Fig. 2B).
Metabolic dynamics instruct CD8+ T-cell differentiation
Naïve CD8+ T cells are maintained in a quiescent state, which requires relatively low energy as these primarily rely on oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) in the mitochondria. When these cells are activated, the metabolism process undergoes reprogramming, and both aerobic glycolysis and OXPHOS pathways are then triggered to meet the high energy needed for rapid cell growth and proliferation . In general, TCR stimulation induces signaling via the ERK/MAPK pathway and calcium influx, while CD28 signaling triggers the activation of the PI3K-Akt-mTOR axis [128, 129]. The two pathways collectively activate the NF-κB pathway [128, 129]. Furthermore, IL-2 and TCR have been implicated in activating PI3K-Akt-mTOR signaling . After TCR stimulation, CD8+ T cells actively engage and rely on glycolysis and glutaminolysis driven by TFs such as c-MYC . The PI3K-Akt-mTOR axis and MYC signaling are the primary regulators of early metabolic changes associated with T-cell activation and differentiation. The metabolic heterogeneity of CD8+ T cells was first observed between effector and memory T cells, and it is generally acknowledged that effector CD8+ T cells primary undergo aerobic glycolysis, whereas memory CD8+ T cells show enhanced OXPHOS and fatty acid oxidation activity [132, 133]. In line with the increased survival potential of memory cells, enhanced spare respiratory capacity (SRC, an indicator of how close to its bioenergetic limit a cell is functioning) fueled by fatty acid oxidation is critical for the formation as well as the recall response of memory cells [134, 135], and defects in fatty acid oxidation can impair memory T-cell formation . Importantly, the mitochondrial metabolism underlying memory CD8+ T-cell function is unique in that it is a futile metabolic cycle triggered first by triacylglycerol (TAG) production from glucose and then the oxidization of TAGs into fatty acids . Other ancillary metabolism pathways, including the pentose phosphate, cholesterol synthesis, polyamine synthesis and hexosamine synthesis pathways, have also been suggested to play important roles in T-cell functions, and their functions have been reviewed elsewhere .
Although no direct comparison of metabolic activity between SLECs and MPECs has been reported, one study showed that by interacting with IL-7Ralpha and further upregulating the glycerol channel aquaporin 9, IL-7 enables the import of glycerol and synthesis of triglycerides, which are critical for CD8+ T-cell maintenance of long-term metabolic fitness . These metabolic advantages may have already been realized by the time that MPECs express IL-7Ralpha at higher levels than those expressed by SLECs, suggesting that metabolic heterogeneity among CD8+ T cells during the effector phase might dictate their future fates.
Paradoxically, although glycolysis is more often related to the effector function of CD8+ T cells, constitutive activation of the glycolysis pathway (together with loss of SRC) by knocking out VHL promoted MPEC formation, while memory-related features, including long-term maintenance, the recall response and virus clearance ability, were not hindered . Interestingly, most of the memory CD8+ T cells produced after genetic manipulation exhibited features of Tem cells, and a direct comparison between Tem and Tcm cells confirmed preferential glycolysis in Tem cells, suggesting that altered metabolism skewed the contents in the heterogeneous memory pool . This heightened glycolytic capacity allowed the Tem cells to proliferate at a faster rate than the Tcm or naïve T cells under hypoxic conditions .
Located within tissues where the oxygen level, nutrients availability and pH values may differ from those in the lymph node/circulation system, Trm shows evident metabolic adaptations [142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149]. Barrier tissues, where Trm cells were first described, are known to exhibit relatively hypoxic conditions [142, 143]. Notably, the combination of hypoxia and TGF-β could induce Trm-like CD8+ T cells in vitro . Regarding nutrients availability, Trm cells in skin have been reported to show upregulated expression of fatty acid-binding proteins, including FABP4/FABP5, to leverage the oxidative metabolism of exogeneous fatty acids, allowing long-term survival in skin . The selective upregulation of fatty acid-binding proteins was later shown to be an organ-specific feature . Additionally, the activation status of Trm cells located in the epithelial barriers of the intestine is directly influenced by the availability of local metabolites, which stands in stark contrast to circulating CD8+ T cells [147, 148]. This effect is particularly pronounced in relation to glucose availability within the local environment [147, 148]. Although the role of pH sensing in CD8+ Trm cells is not clear, mutation of the pH-sensing protein GPR65 could potentially result in altered cellular metabolism of Th17/Th22 in the colon .
During chronic infection or tumorigenesis, the major metabolic pathways, including glycolysis and OXPHOS, in exhausted CD8+ T cells are severely impaired, although the precise nature of the deficiency depends partly on the disease . For example, Tex cells highly depend on glycolysis to meet energetic needs and show poor capacity to perform optimal glycolysis compared to that of SLECs [151, 152]. Regarding mitochondrion-related metabolism, an early study indicated that at the early stage of chronic infection, the mitochondria of Tex cells exhibited higher mass but lower membrane potential, and this dysfunctional state was maintained throughout the late stage of the chronic infection . Several studies later further substantiated the pivotal role of mitochondrial dysfunction in promoting T-cell exhaustion and revealed potential regulatory factors, including hypoxia, persistent antigen exposure, and IRs [153,154,155]. Consistent with these findings, strategies to increase the metabolic fitness of Tex cells have shown promising results for reinvigorating cell functionality.
mTOR: an integrator of cellular metabolism sensors
Optimal T-cell survival and quick responses to stimulation are tightly controlled by metabolic alterations such as catabolism during energy generation and anabolism during biosynthesis . One of the core regulators of metabolic reprogramming is the mTOR signaling cascade . mTOR signaling controls the expression or functional activity of multiple metabolic enzymes by sensing alterations in metabolite levels, especially glucose and amino acid levels . mTOR was first identified as the molecular target of the antifungal agent rapamycin discovered on Easter Island [14, 15, 159]. Over several decades of research, mTOR has been characterized as a key regulator of multiple metabolic processes, including ribosome biogenesis , protein /nucleotide [162, 163]/fatty acid/lipid  synthesis and negative regulation of autophagy .
mTOR forms at least two distinct protein complexes localized in two different subcellular localizations, termed mTORC1 [166, 167] and mTORC2 [168, 169] (Fig. 1). mTORC1 is sensitive to rapamycin treatment or nutrient deprivation, while mTORC2 reacts only to growth factors . mTORC1 is localized mainly on the surface of lysosomes ; the complex consists of mTOR, Raptor, mLST8, PRAS40 and DEPTOR (Fig. 3A). The physiological stimuli of mTORC1 are mainly nutrients, including amino acids [172, 173] and glucose. Amino acids (arginine, leucine) regulate the activity of four small GTPases called RagA/B/C/D , allowing the translocation of mTORC1 to the surface of lysosomes and affecting the phosphorylation of S6K and 4EBP1, which mediate optimal translational control. On the other hand, cellular homeostasis indicators, such as indicators of redox status, can regulate the activity of mTORC1 [175,176,177]; these indicators include DEPDC5, NPRL2 and NPRL3. GATOR1 is inhibited by GATOR2 , and the latter can be inhibited by the leucine sensor SESTRIN2 [179,180,181] and arginine sensor CASTOR . Methionine-derived SAM, on the other hand, targets SAMTOR to activate mTORC1 .
mTORC2, on the other hand, is localized on mitochondrion-associated endoplasmic reticulum membrane . mTORC2 contains core component of Rictor, Sin1/MAPKAP1 and PRR5, in addition to two core components of both mTOR complexes, mLST8 and mTOR (Fig. 3B). The integrity and activity of mTORC2 depends greatly on the close contact between Rictor and Sin1. The Sin1 N-terminal domain is embedded within Rictor and then folds around mLST8 , and this N-terminal domain undergoes another conformational change after substrate binding . A conserved region in the middle (CRIM) of Sin1 is important for Sin1 substrate recruitment because it interacts with mLST8, and the CRIM domain has been verified to interact directly with SGK1, PKC and Akt . After growth factor stimulation-induced PI3K activation, PIP3 facilitates the release of the Sin1 PH domain from autoinhibited mTORC2 and recruits mTORC2 to the cell membrane . The hydrophobic motif (HM) of multiple AGC family kinases, such as Akt S473, is phosphorylated and triggers other downstream signaling cascades, such as FOXO nuclear export and GSK3 phosphorylation pathways, to promote cell survival. In addition, active Akt phosphorylates the mTORC2 component Sin1 at the T86 site, resulting in the establishment of a positive feedback loop [189, 190]. Moreover, mTORC2 shows the capability of phosphorylating another evolutionarily conserved site in AGC kinases in the turn motif at T450 of Akt [191, 192]. During Akt translation, mTORC2 is recruited to active ribosomes and phosphorylates newly synthesized Akt peptides. This phosphorylation event is critical for the correct protein folding and stabilization of Akt because it prevents co-translational ubiquitination and degradation. Recently, Baffi et al. identified a novel set of mTORC2 phosphorylation sites in a conserved motif: FXXXFT, called the TIM motif . Their experiment suggested that in contrast to direct phosphorylation of HM sites, mTORC2 first phosphorylates TIM and then promotes T-loop phosphorylation and HM site autophosphorylation, relieving the nascent dimerization of AGC kinases such as PKC. In addition to its canonical AGC kinase substrates, mTORC2 has also been reported to phosphorylate multiple Hippo pathway components, including AMOTL2, MST1 and YAP [194,195,196], indicating that these two pathways synergistically control organ size by harmonizing cell size and cell number.
Sin1-mediated mTOR signaling
In addition to the different biochemical functions and upstream regulatory effects of the two mTOR complexes, they regulate each other via multiple mechanisms. First, mTORC1 is negatively regulated by its downstream substrate S6K via the phosphorylation of IRS1 and reduction in the IRS1 protein level. This process downregulates insulin-PI3K signaling and thus inactivates mTORC2 . Another known mechanism involves the phosphorylation of growth factor bound-receptor protein 10 (Grb10) at multiple sites and the subsequent stabilization of the protein. Grb10 inhibits the phosphorylation of the insulin receptors InsR and IRS1/2 and destabilizes IRS1, thus suppressing PI3K signaling and mTORC2 activity. S6K has also been reported to phosphorylate Rictor at Thr1135 to suppress mTORC2 formation.
mTORC2, on the other hand, due to its function as a kinase for Akt, inhibits the activity of the TSC complex and thus augments mTORC1 activity and triggers optimal growth factor-induced cell growth . However, our study experiment with Sin1-knockout mouse embryonic fibroblasts demonstrated that Sin1 deficiency leads to the upregulated phosphorylation of S6K . This outcome indicated a previously unknown role for mTORC2 as a potential negative regulator of mTORC1. Two explanations have been attributed to this phenomenon. First, the overall protein levels of mTOR complex subunits are quite low, especially the levels of the two core components mTOR and mLST8. Therefore, in Sin1-deficient cells, all the available mTOR may be integrated into the assembled mTORC1 complex. Another potential mechanism involves the mTORC2 downstream substrate FOXO1, which inhibits transcription of the mTORC1 suppressor Sestrin3 . In either case, mTORC2 potentially inhibits mTORC1 activity. In addition, we recently found that the phosphorylation of one component of GATOR1 was altered in Sin1-deficient cells . Although the detailed molecular mechanism is still unclear, we believe that the Sin1/mTORC2 complex may directly regulate the GATOR1-KICSTOR complex to regulate mTORC1 activity and control cell growth, metabolism, immune responses and tumorigenesis . Thorough investigation into this molecular event will provide new insights into the mTORC1–mTORC2 interaction in addition to the mTORC2/Akt/TSC axis and possibly lead to the characterization of novel targets that can be disturbed for fine tuning mTOR-mediated metabolic regulation.
In addition to the reciprocal regulation between mTORC1 and mTORC2, these complexes may be activated synergistically. For example, a Ras homolog enriched in the striatum has been shown to interact with both complexes and activate mTOR activity . PRAS40, on the other hand, interacts with both mTORC1 and mTORC2 and suppresses their activity . Additionally, the small GTPase Rac1 promotes the activity of both complexes. Activation of the two mTOR complexes leads to the upregulation of both transcription and translation mediated through the mTORC1/S6K and mTORC2/Akt axes .
In summary, understanding the detailed molecular events that interlink mTORC1 and mTORC2 will advance the understanding of how eukaryotic cells integrate surrounding nutrient and growth factor signaling to coordinate optimal protein synthesis and cellular metabolism; this understanding can be then leveraged for the treatment of various metabolic diseases and promotion of healthy aging. For T cells, sensitivity to environmental cues and rapid responses are pivotal for the quick modulation of intracellular signaling and the execution of optimal effector functioning and immunological memory.
mTORC1/mTORC2 activity differentially dictates CD8+ T-cell fate
During the effector phase, treatment with rapamycin leads to the acquisition of the MPEC phenotype by antigen-specific CD8+ T cells . The result of this process is largely due to the reduced apoptosis rate of antigen-specific CD8+ T cells, which ensures the survival and differentiation of memory precursors into long-lived memory cells. Treatment with rapamycin during the memory phase leads to the significant enrichment of the CD127+CD62L+ Tcm cell population, and overall enhanced recall expansion and homeostatic proliferation are also observed . This systemic rapamycin treatment-induced phenomenon has been further proven to be T-cell intrinsic and mTORC1 specific . Further perturbation of CD8+ T-cell-specific Raptor or mTOR activity resulted in a phenotype similar to that observed in rapamycin-treated organisms, indicating T-cell-intrinsic mTORC1 suppression of memory T-cell differentiation [204, 205]. Consistent with this finding, loss of mTORC1 activity by genetically knocking out Rheb in T cells led to a higher CD127 level as well as accelerated formation of antigen-specific CD8+ T cells during the memory phase, although these cells failed to respond to further rechallenge . Constitutive activation of mTORC1 by genetic knock out of TSC1 and TSC2 led to accelerated effector cell formation, as exemplified by higher KLRG1 expression, greater stimulation-induced expansion and increased cytokine production, but the memory function was severely impaired in these CD8+ T cells [206, 207].
The activity of the mTORC2 pathway also contributes to T-cell fate decisions. Loss of mTORC2 activity by Rictor knockout promoted the formation of MPECs and long-term antigen-specific memory T cells with better cytokine-producing ability after rechallenge . Similar observations were subsequently reported, and Rictor deficiency led to significantly higher IL-2 production at the peak of the primary T-cell response . The unphosphorylated form of FOXO1, established due to deficient mTORC2 activity (and further dampened SGK1 activity ), as been suggested to accumulate in the nucleus, where it promotes the expression of the memory-related TFs Eomes and TCF-1, while the expression of the effector-related TF T-bet was decreased, collectively leading to memory T-cell subsets formation .
mTORC1/2 governs the formation of Trm cells. Treatment with rapamycin or mTOR knockdown reduced the rate of memory CD8+ T-cell accumulation in both mesenteric lymph nodes and the small intestine after acute vesicular stomatitis (VSV) infection and concurrently reduced the expression of CCR9, Integrin alpha-4 and CD103, suggesting that memory CD8+ T-cell trafficking to the intestinal mucosa requires mTORC1 activity . The accumulation of resident memory CD8+ T cells in the lung after influenza infection has also been reported to depend on mTORC1 activity . Further analysis revealed that mTORC1 is located downstream of IL-15 and TGF-β and is critical for the upregulation of SLEC-/Trm-related TFs (such as BCL-6, T-bet and BLIMP-1), the increase in cytotoxic molecules (such as GZMB) and increased mitochondrial fitness . Since IL-15 and TGF-β also enhance the phosphorylation of AktS473 and downstream phosphorylation of FOXO1 S253 , mTORC2 may participate in the formation of Trm cells via the action of factors downstream of the IL-15/mTORC1 pathway. Indeed, the tissue-egression program activity represented by the expression of Klf2, which is controlled by unphosphorylated for FOXO1, was diminished in the presence of IL-15/TGF-β .
During the process of T-cell exhaustion, CD8+ T cells in general exhibit impaired mTORC1 (measured by the phosphorylation rate of S6) and mTORC2 (measured by the phosphorylation rates of Akt S473 and FOXO1/3a) activity compared with that in antigen-specific T cells in the context of acute infection . While mTORC1 activity was required for restored metabolism in Tex cells and enhanced their cytokine secretion after anti-PD-1 treatment, the suppressed mTORC2 activity sustained the FOXO1 in the unphosphorylated state, which is critical for upregulated PD-1 expression in Tex cells (later found to be essential for the formation of the Tex cell lineage), the T-bethi subset of Tex cells differentiated into the Eomeshi cells and survived throughout chronic infection ; these data support a “maladaptation” view of T-cell exhaustion . A later study dissected the subset-specific roles of mTORC1 and demonstrated that compared to Tex or effector cells, progenitor Tex cells showed reduced mTORC1 activity due to selective and heightened TGF-β signaling, but the mTORC1 pathway was reactivated after antigen stimulation, which allowed these cells to acquire a certain level of metabolic fitness [213, 214]. Treatment with rapamycin in the early stages of chronic infection led to a higher number of progenitor Tex cells (marked by TCF-1 and CXCR5 expression), fewer Tex cells (marked by TIM-3 expression), and increased proliferation as well as cytokine production, ultimately leading to enhanced systemic efficacy of anti-PD-L1 therapy [214, 215]. Treatment with rapamycin after the establishment of chronic infection was deleterious because the transition of progenitor Tex cells to effector cells (marked by CX3CR1 expression) required the action of the mTORC1 signaling pathway , which may explain the molecular similarities between CX3CR1+ effector cells and SLECs. In general, among CD8+ T-cell subsets, mTORC1/2 exert distinct influences through multiple regulatory mechanisms (Fig. 2).
Sin1/mTORC2 controls T-cell memory formation and exhaustion
Adaptive immune cells, especially T cells, undergo metabolic network remodeling to initiate rapid and effective immune responses after pathogen invasion or during tumorigenesis to prevent autoimmune responses and malignancy. This process requires both agile sensors and powerful integrators, such as mTOR, which has been shown to promote T-cell development. The mTOR component Sin1 is essential for multiple stages of functional T-cell maturation from development, cytokine production and immune niche regulation. Sin1 has been shown to modulate the number of Foxp3+Helios+ thymic regulatory T cells . Another study revealed a key role for Sin1 in regulating double-negative thymocyte glucose metabolism upon β-selection activation via the Akt/PPARγ signaling cascade . After T cells have finished undergoing developmental processes and have egressed into tissues and the circulatory system, Sin1/mTORC2 contributes to CXCR4 expression suppression downstream of Akt/FOXO, which prevents naïve T cells from homing to bone marrow .
During effector and memory formation, mTORC2 has minimal impact on the effector T-cell response, but deficiency of the mTORC2 component Rictor leads to an increased potential to differentiate into memory precursors rather than SLECs [208, 216]. Interestingly, memory T cells have been found to accumulate in bone marrow. This process is controlled by CXCR4-CXCL12 and S1P-S1P. Bone marrow homing of CD8+ T cells facilitates antibacterial immunity after diet restriction via the downregulation of both mTORC1 and mTORC2 signaling , which perfectly matches our previous finding showing Sin1/mTORC2 suppression of CXCR4 prevented T-cell bone marrow accumulation.
In the process of T-cell exhaustion, inhibition of the mTORC2-Akt axis leads to the translocation of FOXO1 into the nucleus, which directly regulates the expression of PD-1 and causes the terminal differentiation of PD-1hi Eomeshi CD8+ T cells (presumably Tex cells) during chronic infection . A recent article revealed a positive correlation between SGK1 expression and T-cell exhaustion features in hepatocellular carcinoma  and suggested the possibility that the mTORC2-AKT-FOXO1 and mTORC2-SGK1 pathways are important regulatory axes for T-cell exhaustion. Additional research is needed to explore the mechanisms by which mTORC2 and Sin1/mTORC2 regulate T-cell exhaustion. The potential explanation for the diverse influences of mTORC2 on CD8+ T cells may be partially explained by the multiple molecules downstream of mTORC2 contributing to distinct aspects of T-cell development (Fig. 4A).
mTOR determines the fate of CD8+ T cells by regulating the expression of TFs
T-bet and Eomes
T-bet and Eomes both belong to the T-box TF family. During acute infection, T-bet drives CTL differentiation, while Eomes promotes immunological memory . IL-12 has been reported to favor effector vs. memory cell generation by promoting T-bet and inhibiting Eomes expression . Furthermore, IL-12-induced STAT4 signaling pathways enhance and maintain mTOR activity, which is required to sustain T-bet expression and effector cell differentiation . Rapamycin treatment upregulates Eomes expression and inhibits IFN-γ production in the secondary but not the primary phase of antigen stimulation mainly due to its role in blocking persistent T-bet expression . However, the ability of mTOR to sustain T-bet expression deserves further study. In CD4+ T cells, mTORC1 has been reported to regulate T-bet phosphorylation to promote Th1 cell differentiation . Whether this increased expression of Eomes is directly regulated by mTOR signaling pathways or is a consequence of decreased T-bet expression remains unclear.
During chronic infection, the action of the TFs T-bet and Eomes are both needed to maintain the antigen-specific T-cell pool . Studies have shown that persistent T-bet expression is required for the generation of CD8+ T cells with higher effector function after chronic antigen stimulation, that of CX3CR1+ effector cells [3, 12, 13, 99]. Enforced expression of T-bet promoted progenitor Tex cells to differentiate into effector cells and not exhausted cells [12, 99]. mTOR activity is suppressed in progenitor Tex cells, which retain the ability to activate this pathway when differentiating into effector or Tex cells . However, Eomes plays a more complex role in regulating effector- and exhaustion-related gene expression; notably, although it function together with T-bet for functional effector cell differentiation, it is expressed the highest in terminally exhausted cells and promotes T-cell exhaustion in the contexts of chronic infection and cancer [13, 95, 115]. Moreover, how mTOR controls T-bet and Eomes expression to regulate T-cell exhaustion is not fully understood.
Previous studies have shown that FOXO1 promotes memory CD8 T-cell formation by directly regulating the expression of Eomes, T-bet, and TCF-1 [222,223,224]. Depletion of FOXO1 reverses the effects of Rictor deficiency on the formation of memory T cells, indicating that the mTORC2-Akt-FOXO1 signaling pathway plays a vital role in controlling the differentiation of memory T cells . The primary mechanism underlying transcriptional reprogramming is the nuclear stabilization of FOXO1 . However, persistent antigen exposure suppresses the TCR-mediated activation of Akt and mTOR signaling . mTORC2–Akt axis dysfunction leads to a decreased FOXO1 phosphorylation rate, thereby driving nuclear accumulation of FOXO1, which sustains the expression of the inhibitory receptor PD-1 and induces the terminal differentiation of exhausted CD8+ T cells during chronic infection . Given the importance of FOXO1 in the generation of both memory and terminally exhausted T cells, further studies are needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms involved these distinct outcomes. The following hypotheses may be tested. First, PD-1 expression is crucial for T-cell exhaustion, but several studies have indicated that in the acute infection context, PD-1 expression is required for optimal memory T-cell development [83, 225]. Thus, the Foxo1-PD-1 axis might be important for both exhausted and memory T-cell formation. Second, many TFs are common to different subsets of T cells, but they exhibit different behaviors, which are influenced by the openness of chromatin, DNA-binding partners, etc. . Therefore, although different subsets of T cells are influenced by the genetic loss of FOXO1, they may also be affected by distinct epigenetic programs.
In T cells, MYC expression is rapidly induced in response to engagement of TCRs, and MYC expression is sustained via the actions of costimulatory receptors and cytokines such as IL-2. MYC-deficient T cells exhibit defects in glucose and glutamine metabolism and cannot proliferate or differentiate [131, 227]. During the first division of an activated CD8+ T-cell, asymmetric distribution of mTORC1 and amino acids leads to asymmetric MYC levels in daughter T cells . Thus, daughter T cells that carry a higher level of MYC tend to follow a developmental path toward SLEC differentiation, while those with low MYC levels are more likely to differentiate into MPECs . MYC expression affects other signaling pathways. For example, recently showed that activation of mTORC1 is not required for MYC expression in activated T cells, but it exerts a substantive effect on the expression of glucose transporter proteins .
The interplay between differential mTORC1/mTORC2 activities and metabolic pathways in CD8+ T cells
The differential activities of mTORC1/mTORC2 in each CD8+ T subset is reflected by the distinct metabolic pathways they influence. In general, effector CD8+ T cells primarily undergo aerobic glycolysis, whereas memory CD8+ T cells show enhanced OXPHOS and fatty acid oxidation activity . Moreover, the major metabolic pathways, including glycolysis and OXPHOS, in exhausted CD8+ T cells are severely impaired, although the exact nature of the deficiency depends partly on the type of disease .
mTORC1 signals are necessary for initiating the cell cycle and synchronizing the initial metabolic alterations that take place after T-cell activation. Raptor-deficient T cells cannot upregulate the expression of Glut1 or other glycolytic enzymes during their own activation and thus the production of new lipids and OXPHOS function is impaired . In addition to its role in T-cell activation, mTORC1 regulates the metabolism of effector T-cell differentiation. Loss of mTORC1 leads to the upregulated expression of several transcripts related to mitochondrial metabolism, including fatty acid oxidation-related transcripts . CD8 memory T cells deficient in Rictor, an essential component of mTORC2, may enhance overall metabolic fitness, as shown by the enhanced glycolysis and the SRC of mitochondria [206, 208] (Fig. 4B).
Memory T cells need to sustain effector metabolic programs after restimulation, which requires mTOR signaling. During the recall response, after TCR and costimulation, the higher activity of the mTORC2 signaling pathway within Tem and Tcm cells subsets (compared with the naïve T-cell subset) may enhance immediate glycolytic flux by activating the AKT-GAPDH axis, which allows these cells to rapidly upregulate IFN-gamma expression through histone remodeling . The activation of the mTORC2-Akt signaling pathway under this condition was later shown to mediate metabolic influx in mitochondria by facilitating the binding of HK-I and VDAC .
mTORC1 signaling, presumably caused by persistent antigen stimulation, is thought to give rise to mitochondrial dysfunction since treatment with rapamycin largely restores most of the mitochondrial defects seen in Tex cells in the early stage of chronic infection . This result may partially explain progenitor Tex cell expansion after rapamycin treatment and further suggests a promising strategy to reinvigorate Tex-cell function by manipulating mTOR-related metabolism (Fig. 4C).
The potential of manipulating mTORC1/mTORC2 activity with pharmaceuticals
Because of the important regulatory functions of mTOR in cell growth and metabolic control, three generations of mTOR inhibitors have been developed . The first generation of mTOR inhibitors consists mainly of rapamycin and its derivatives (known as Rapalogs), which target mTOR and FKBP12 to change the conformation of mTOR and thus inhibit the kinase activity of mTORC1 . The second generation of mTOR inhibitors are ATP-competitive inhibitors, including TORIN, which inhibit mTORC1 and mTORC2 simultaneously . Third-generation mTOR inhibitors include the Rictor-mTOR interaction blocker JR-AB2-011 and the linked Rapalog-ATP competitor RapaLink-1, which both show increased target selectivity or effectiveness .
Consistent with the roles of mTORC1/mTORC2 in dictating CD8+ T-cell fate, manipulating these pathways has been reported to endow CD8+ T cells with greater antitumor ability: pretreatment of CAR-T cells with rapamycin during the ex vivo expansion stage reduced mTORC1 activity and upregulated the expression of CXCR4, allowing these cells to infiltrate bone marrow and eliminate resident AML cells . Another study confirmed the therapeutic potential of rapamycin in CAR-T therapy by showing that the combined use of IL-2 and rapamycin allowed human CAR-T cells to acquire memory stem cell features (CD45RA+CCR7+; CD62L+CD127+; CD62L+CD27+) . Considering the effects of the mTORC2 signaling pathway, cholesterol-lowering therapy may dampen mTORC2 activity in CD8+ T cells, allowing these cells to acquire features of Tcm cells (higher CD62L+CD44+, Eomes+ cell subsets and better recall responses) and ultimately show better control over tumors .
Targeting mTOR signaling has been suggested to improve the efficacy of PD-1-targeted therapy. PD-1-targeted therapies enhance the T-cell response against chronic infection and tumors by promoting progenitor Tex cell differentiation into effector cell subsets [5, 9, 13]. Studies have evaluated whether an enhanced number and quality of progenitor Tex cells induced by rapamycin exerts a beneficial effect on PD-1-targeted therapy. Blocking mTOR during the T-cell expansion phase enhanced the T-cell response by inducing the accumulation of stem-like T cells, leading to increased efficacy of PD-1 immunotherapy, whereas after exhaustion had progressed, mTOR inhibition caused immunosuppression, characterized by a decrease in the number of TIM3+ cells and increased viral load with minimal changes to stem-like T cells . Metabolically, PD-1 signals are necessary for regulating the critical balance of mTOR-dependent anabolic glycolysis and fatty acid oxidation programs to meet the bioenergetic needs of quiescent CD8+ memory T cells .
Concluding remarks and future directions
Immunological memory and exhaustion are essential components of adaptive immunity. Our understanding of the heterogeneity and diversity of memory and exhaustion CD8+ T-cell subsets has increased profoundly in the past decade. However, further studies are needed to elucidate the intracellular molecules and pathways that regulate CD8+ T-cell fate and lead to the heterogeneity in memory T cells and Tex cells. mTOR signaling is a central hub that coordinates multiple signaling pathways and plays a critical role in regulating various aspects of T-cell function. Despite the aforementioned findings, many fundamental questions remain unanswered. For instance, how is mTOR activity precisely regulated in CD8+ T-cell subsets? This remains an exciting field of research. Additional research is necessary to explore the distinct roles of mTORC1 and mTORC2 in regulating the development of memory T cells and Tex cells, especially the mechanism by which mTORC2- and Sin1-mediated mTORC2 signaling leads to T-cell exhaustion. Recent studies have shown that the mTOR pathway can epigenetically regulate T cells by modulating the activity of enzymes that modify chromatin structure and DNA methylation, which in turn affects gene expression. Further research is needed to fully understand the mechanisms underlying this regulatory program and its implications for T-cell function in health and disease. CD8+ T-cell subsets, such as memory and effector cell subsets, exhibit distinct metabolic requirements, and meeting these needs is critical for their function and survival. Over several decades of research, mTOR has been identified as a key regulator of multiple metabolic processes. It controls the overall level or functional activity of multiple metabolic enzymes by sensing alterations in metabolite levels, especially in glucose and amino acid levels. The molecular mechanisms by which mTOR signaling regulate glycolytic pathways, oxidation and mitochondrial function in T cells are also incompletely understood. Additional research is required to clarify the potential of targeting the mTOR pathway as a therapeutic strategy for modulating cellular metabolism and enhancing the restoration of exhausted T-cell function.
Joshi NS, Cui W, Chandele A, Lee HK, Urso DR, Hagman J, et al. Inflammation directs memory precursor and short-lived effector CD8(+) T cell fates via the graded expression of T-bet transcription factor. Immunity. 2007;27:281–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2007.07.010.
Blank CU, Haining WN, Held W, Hogan PG, Kallies A, Lugli E, et al. Defining ‘T cell exhaustion’. Nat Rev Immunol. 2019;19:665–74. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41577-019-0221-9.
Chen Z, Ji Z, Ngiow SF, Manne S, Cai Z, Huang AC, et al. TCF-1-centered transcriptional network drives an effector versus exhausted CD8 T cell-fate decision. Immunity. 2019;51:840–55.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2019.09.013.
He R, Hou S, Liu C, Zhang A, Bai Q, Han M, et al. Follicular CXCR5- expressing CD8(+) T cells curtail chronic viral infection. Nature. 2016;537:412–28. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19317.
Im SJ, Hashimoto M, Gerner MY, Lee J, Kissick HT, Burger MC, et al. Defining CD8+ T cells that provide the proliferative burst after PD-1 therapy. Nature. 2016;537:417–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19330.
Leong YA, Chen Y, Ong HS, Wu D, Man K, Deleage C, et al. CXCR5(+) follicular cytotoxic T cells control viral infection in B cell follicles. Nat Immunol. 2016;17:1187–96. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.3543.
Utzschneider DT, Charmoy M, Chennupati V, Pousse L, Ferreira DP, Calderon-Copete S, et al. T cell factor 1-expressing memory-like CD8(+) T cells sustain the immune response to chronic viral infections. Immunity. 2016;45:415–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2016.07.021.
Wu T, Ji Y, Moseman EA, Xu HC, Manglani M, Kirby M, et al. The TCF1-Bcl6 axis counteracts type I interferon to repress exhaustion and maintain T cell stemness. Sci Immunol. 2016;1. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciimmunol.aai8593.
Hudson WH, Gensheimer J, Hashimoto M, Wieland A, Valanparambil RM, Li P, et al. Proliferating transitory T cells with an effector-like transcriptional signature emerge from PD-1(+) stem-like CD8(+) T cells during chronic infection. Immunity. 2019;51:1043–58.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2019.11.002.
Alfei F, Kanev K, Hofmann M, Wu M, Ghoneim HE, Roelli P, et al. TOX reinforces the phenotype and longevity of exhausted T cells in chronic viral infection. Nature. 2019;571:265–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1326-9.
Yao C, Sun HW, Lacey NE, Ji Y, Moseman EA, Shih HY, et al. Single-cell RNA-seq reveals TOX as a key regulator of CD8(+) T cell persistence in chronic infection. Nat Immunol. 2019;20:890–901. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-019-0403-4.
Chen Y, Zander RA, Wu X, Schauder DM, Kasmani MY, Shen J, et al. BATF regulates progenitor to cytolytic effector CD8(+) T cell transition during chronic viral infection. Nat Immunol. 2021;22:996–1007. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-021-00965-7.
Zander R, Schauder D, Xin G, Nguyen C, Wu X, Zajac A, et al. CD4(+) T cell help is required for the formation of a cytolytic CD8(+) T cell subset that protects against chronic infection and cancer. Immunity. 2019;51:1028–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2019.10.009.
Vezina C, Kudelski A, Sehgal SN. Rapamycin (AY-22,989), a new antifungal antibiotic. I. Taxonomy of the producing streptomycete and isolation of the active principle. J Antibiot. 1975;28:721–6. https://doi.org/10.7164/antibiotics.28.721.
Sehgal SN, Baker H, Vezina C. Rapamycin (AY-22,989), a new antifungal antibiotic. II. Fermentation, isolation and characterization. J Antibiot. 1975;28:727–32. https://doi.org/10.7164/antibiotics.28.727.
Wullschleger S, Loewith R, Hall MN. TOR signaling in growth and metabolism. Cell. 2006;124:471–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2006.01.016.
Saxton RA, Sabatini DM. mTOR signaling in growth, metabolism, and disease. Cell. 2017;168:960–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.02.004.
Sabatini DM. Twenty-five years of mTOR: uncovering the link from nutrients to growth. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2017;114:11818–25. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1716173114.
Su B, Jacinto E. Mammalian TOR signaling to the AGC kinases. Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 2011;46:527–47. https://doi.org/10.3109/10409238.2011.618113.
Ruan C, Ouyang X, Liu H, Li S, Jin J, Tang W, et al. Sin1-mediated mTOR signaling in cell growth, metabolism and immune response. Natl Sci Rev. 2019;6:1149–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/nsr/nwz171.
Hsu PP, Kang SA, Rameseder J, Zhang Y, Ottina KA, Lim D, et al. The mTOR-regulated phosphoproteome reveals a mechanism of mTORC1-mediated inhibition of growth factor signaling. Science. 2011;332:1317–22. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1199498.
Jacinto E, Facchinetti V, Liu D, Soto N, Wei S, Jung SY, et al. SIN1/MIP1 maintains rictor-mTOR complex integrity and regulates Akt phosphorylation and substrate specificity. Cell. 2006;127:125–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2006.08.033.
Huang H, Long L, Zhou P, Chapman NM, Chi H. mTOR signaling at the crossroads of environmental signals and T-cell fate decisions. Immunol Rev. 2020;295:15–38. https://doi.org/10.1111/imr.12845.
Ouyang X, Han Y, Qu G, Li M, Wu N, Liu H, et al. Metabolic regulation of T cell development by Sin1-mTORC2 is mediated by pyruvate kinase M2. J Mol Cell Biol. 2019;11:93–106. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmcb/mjy065.
Arojo OA, Ouyang X, Liu D, Meng T, Kaech SM, Pereira JP, et al. Active mTORC2 signaling in naive T cells suppresses bone marrow homing by inhibiting CXCR4 expression. J Immunol. 2018;201:908–15. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1800529.
Chang X, Lazorchak AS, Liu D, Su B. Sin1 regulates Treg-cell development but is not required for T-cell growth and proliferation. Eur J Immunol. 2012;42:1639–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/eji.201142066.
Chi H. Regulation and function of mTOR signalling in T cell fate decisions. Nat Rev Immunol. 2012;12:325–38. https://doi.org/10.1038/nri3198.
Kaech SM, Tan JT, Wherry EJ, Konieczny BT, Surh CD, Ahmed R. Selective expression of the interleukin 7 receptor identifies effector CD8 T cells that give rise to long-lived memory cells. Nat Immunol. 2003;4:1191–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni1009.
Kaech SM, Wherry EJ. Heterogeneity and cell-fate decisions in effector and memory CD8+ T cell differentiation during viral infection. Immunity. 2007;27:393–405. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2007.08.007.
Zhou X, Xue HH. Cutting edge: generation of memory precursors and functional memory CD8+ T cells depends on T cell factor-1 and lymphoid enhancer-binding factor-1. J Immunol. 2012;189:2722–6. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1201150.
Jeannet G, Boudousquié C, Gardiol N, Kang J, Huelsken J, Held W. Essential role of the Wnt pathway effector Tcf-1 for the establishment of functional CD8 T cell memory. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107:9777–82. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0914127107.
Yuzefpolskiy Y, Baumann FM, Kalia V, Sarkar S. Early CD8 T-cell memory precursors and terminal effectors exhibit equipotent in vivo degranulation. Cell Mol Immunol. 2015;12:400–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/cmi.2014.48.
Teixeiro E, Daniels MA, Hamilton SE, Schrum AG, Bragado R, Jameson SC, et al. Different T cell receptor signals determine CD8+ memory versus effector development. Science. 2009;323:502–5. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1163612.
Chang JT, Palanivel VR, Kinjyo I, Schambach F, Intlekofer AM, Banerjee A, et al. Asymmetric T lymphocyte division in the initiation of adaptive immune responses. Science. 2007;315:1687–91. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1139393.
Avery L, Filderman J, Szymczak-Workman AL, Kane LP. Tim-3 co-stimulation promotes short-lived effector T cells, restricts memory precursors, and is dispensable for T cell exhaustion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2018;115:2455–60. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1712107115.
Duckworth BC, Lafouresse F, Wimmer VC, Broomfield BJ, Dalit L, Alexandre YO, et al. Effector and stem-like memory cell fates are imprinted in distinct lymph node niches directed by CXCR3 ligands. Nat Immunol. 2021;22:434–48. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-021-00878-5.
Obar JJ, Jellison ER, Sheridan BS, Blair DA, Pham QM, Zickovich JM, et al. Pathogen-induced inflammatory environment controls effector and memory CD8+ T cell differentiation. J Immunol. 2011;187:4967–78. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1102335.
Dominguez CX, Amezquita RA, Guan T, Marshall HD, Joshi NS, Kleinstein SH, et al. The transcription factors ZEB2 and T-bet cooperate to program cytotoxic T cell terminal differentiation in response to LCMV viral infection. J Exp Med. 2015;212:2041–56. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.20150186.
Rutishauser RL, Martins GA, Kalachikov S, Chandele A, Parish IA, Meffre E, et al. Transcriptional repressor Blimp-1 promotes CD8(+) T cell terminal differentiation and represses the acquisition of central memory T cell properties. Immunity. 2009;31:296–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2009.05.014.
Yang CY, Best JA, Knell J, Yang E, Sheridan AD, Jesionek AK, et al. The transcriptional regulators Id2 and Id3 control the formation of distinct memory CD8+ T cell subsets. Nat Immunol. 2011;12:1221–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.2158.
Delpoux A, Lai CY, Hedrick SM, Doedens AL. FOXO1 opposition of CD8(+) T cell effector programming confers early memory properties and phenotypic diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2017;114:E8865–74. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1618916114.
Renkema KR, Huggins MA, Borges da Silva H, Knutson TP, Henzler CM, Hamilton SE. KLRG1(+) memory CD8 T cells combine properties of short-lived effectors and long-lived memory. J Immunol. 2020;205:1059–69. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1901512.
Olson JA, McDonald-Hyman C, Jameson SC, Hamilton SE. Effector-like CD8+ T cells in the memory population mediate potent protective immunity. Immunity. 2013;38:1250–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2013.05.009.
Jameson SC, Masopust D. Understanding subset diversity in T cell memory. Immunity. 2018;48:214–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2018.02.010.
Steinert EM, Schenkel JM, Fraser KA, Beura LK, Manlove LS, Igyártó BZ, et al. Quantifying memory CD8 T cells reveals regionalization of immunosurveillance. Cell. 2015;161:737–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.03.031.
Rahimi RA, Luster AD. Redefining memory T cell subsets. Trends Immunol. 2020;41:645–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.it.2020.06.003.
Sallusto F, Lenig D, Förster R, Lipp M, Lanzavecchia A. Two subsets of memory T lymphocytes with distinct homing potentials and effector functions. Nature. 1999;401:708–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/44385.
Wherry EJ, Teichgräber V, Becker TC, Masopust D, Kaech SM, Antia R, et al. Lineage relationship and protective immunity of memory CD8 T cell subsets. Nat Immunol. 2003;4:225–34. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni889.
Masopust D, Vezys V, Marzo AL, Lefrancois L. Preferential localization of effector memory cells in nonlymphoid tissue. Science. 2001;291:2413–7. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1058867.
Böttcher JP, Beyer M, Meissner F, Abdullah Z, Sander J, Höchst B, et al. Functional classification of memory CD8(+) T cells by CX3CR1 expression. Nat Commun. 2015;6:8306. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms9306.
Geginat J, Lanzavecchia A, Sallusto F. Proliferation and differentiation potential of human CD8+ memory T-cell subsets in response to antigen or homeostatic cytokines. Blood. 2003;101:4260–6. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2002-11-3577.
Gattinoni L, Speiser DE, Lichterfeld M, Bonini C. T memory stem cells in health and disease. Nat Med. 2017;23:18–27. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.4241.
Kok L, Dijkgraaf FE, Urbanus J, Bresser K, Vredevoogd DW, Cardoso RF, et al. A committed tissue-resident memory T cell precursor within the circulating CD8+ effector T cell pool. J Exp Med. 2020;217. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.20191711.
Matos TR, Gehad A, Teague JE, Dyring-Andersen B, Benezeder T, Dowlatshahi M, et al. Central memory T cells are the most effective precursors of resident memory T cells in human skin. Sci Immunol. 2022;7:eabn1889. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciimmunol.abn1889.
Gaide O, Emerson RO, Jiang X, Gulati N, Nizza S, Desmarais C, et al. Common clonal origin of central and resident memory T cells following skin immunization. Nat Med. 2015;21:647–53. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.3860.
Kok L, Masopust D, Schumacher TN. The precursors of CD8(+) tissue resident memory T cells: from lymphoid organs to infected tissues. Nat Rev Immunol. 2022;22:283–93. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41577-021-00590-3.
Hou S, Shao T, Mao T, Shi J, Sun J, Mei M, et al. Virtual memory T cells orchestrate extralymphoid responses conducive to resident memory. Sci Immunol. 2021;6:eabg9433. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciimmunol.abg9433.
Mackay LK, Rahimpour A, Ma JZ, Collins N, Stock AT, Hafon ML, et al. The developmental pathway for CD103(+)CD8+ tissue-resident memory T cells of skin. Nat Immunol. 2013;14:1294–301. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.2744.
Mackay LK, Minnich M, Kragten NA, Liao Y, Nota B, Seillet C, et al. Hobit and Blimp1 instruct a universal transcriptional program of tissue residency in lymphocytes. Science. 2016;352:459–63. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad2035.
Milner JJ, Toma C, He Z, Kurd NS, Nguyen QP, McDonald B, et al. Heterogenous populations of tissue-resident CD8(+) T cells are generated in response to infection and malignancy. Immunity. 2020;52:808–824.e7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2020.04.007.
Christo SN, Evrard M, Park SL, Gandolfo LC, Burn TN, Fonseca R, et al. Discrete tissue microenvironments instruct diversity in resident memory T cell function and plasticity. Nat Immunol. 2021;22:1140–51. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-021-01004-1.
Lin YH, Duong HG, Limary AE, Kim ES, Hsu P, Patel SA, et al. Small intestine and colon tissue-resident memory CD8(+) T cells exhibit molecular heterogeneity and differential dependence on Eomes. Immunity. 2023;56:207–223.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2022.12.007.
Crowl JT, Heeg M, Ferry A, Milner JJ, Omilusik KD, Toma C, et al. Tissue-resident memory CD8(+) T cells possess unique transcriptional, epigenetic and functional adaptations to different tissue environments. Nat Immunol. 2022;23:1121–31. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-022-01229-8.
Mani V, Bromley SK, Äijö T, Mora-Buch R, Carrizosa E, Warner RD, et al. Migratory DCs activate TGF-β to precondition naïve CD8(+) T cells for tissue-resident memory fate. Science. 2019;366. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aav5728.
Mackay LK, Wynne-Jones E, Freestone D, Pellicci DG, Mielke LA, Newman DM, et al. T-box transcription factors combine with the cytokines TGF-β and IL-15 to control tissue-resident memory T cell fate. Immunity. 2015;43:1101–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2015.11.008.
McLane LM, Abdel-Hakeem MS, Wherry EJ. CD8 T cell exhaustion during chronic viral infection and cancer. Annu Rev Immunol. 2019;37:457–95. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-immunol-041015-055318.
Wherry EJ. T cell exhaustion. Nat Immunol. 2011;12:492–9.
Wherry EJ, Kurachi M. Molecular and cellular insights into T cell exhaustion. Nat Rev Immunol. 2015;15:486–99. https://doi.org/10.1038/nri3862.
Fuertes Marraco SA, Neubert NJ, Verdeil G, Speiser DE. Inhibitory receptors beyond T cell exhaustion. Front Immunol. 2015;6:310. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2015.00310.
Goepfert PA, Bansal A, Edwards BH, Ritter GD Jr, Tellez I, McPherson SA, et al. A significant number of human immunodeficiency virus epitope-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes detected by tetramer binding do not produce gamma interferon. J Virol. 2000;74:10249–55.
Radziewicz H, Ibegbu CC, Fernandez ML, Workowski KA, Obideen K, Wehbi M, et al. Liver-infiltrating lymphocytes in chronic human hepatitis C virus infection display an exhausted phenotype with high levels of PD-1 and low levels of CD127 expression. J Virol. 2007;81:2545–53. https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.02021-06.
Reignat S, Webster GJ, Brown D, Ogg GS, King A, Seneviratne SL, et al. Escaping high viral load exhaustion: CD8 cells with altered tetramer binding in chronic hepatitis B virus infection. J Exp Med. 2002;195:1089–101. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.20011723.
Zajac AJ, Blattman JN, Murali-Krishna K, Sourdive DJ, Suresh M, Altman JD, et al. Viral immune evasion due to persistence of activated T cells without effector function. J Exp Med. 1998;188:2205–13.
Appay V, Dunbar PR, Callan M, Klenerman P, Gillespie GM, Papagno L, et al. Memory CD8+ T cells vary in differentiation phenotype in different persistent virus infections. Nat Med. 2002;8:379–85. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm0402-379.
Rehr M, Cahenzli J, Haas A, Price DA, Gostick E, Huber M, et al. Emergence of polyfunctional CD8+ T cells after prolonged suppression of human immunodeficiency virus replication by antiretroviral therapy. J Virol. 2008;82:3391–404. https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.02383-07.
Streeck H, Brumme ZL, Anastario M, Cohen KW, Jolin JS, Meier A, et al. Antigen load and viral sequence diversification determine the functional profile of HIV-1-specific CD8+ T cells. PLoS Med. 2008;5:e100. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0050100.
Mueller SN, Ahmed R. High antigen levels are the cause of T cell exhaustion during chronic viral infection. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106:8623–8. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0809818106.
Angelosanto JM, Blackburn SD, Crawford A, Wherry EJ. Progressive loss of memory T cell potential and commitment to exhaustion during chronic viral infection. J Virol. 2012;86:8161–70. https://doi.org/10.1128/JVI.00889-12.
Brooks DG, McGavern DB, Oldstone MB. Reprogramming of antiviral T cells prevents inactivation and restores T cell activity during persistent viral infection. J Clin Invest. 2006;116:1675–85. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI26856.
Bettonville M, d’Aria S, Weatherly K, Porporato PE, Zhang J, Bousbata S, et al. Long-term antigen exposure irreversibly modifies metabolic requirements for T cell function. Elife. 2018;7. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.30938.
Doering TA, Crawford A, Angelosanto JM, Paley MA, Ziegler CG, Wherry EJ. Network analysis reveals centrally connected genes and pathways involved in CD8+ T cell exhaustion versus memory. Immunity. 2012;37:1130–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2012.08.021.
Philip M, Fairchild L, Sun L, Horste EL, Camara S, Shakiba M, et al. Chromatin states define tumour-specific T cell dysfunction and reprogramming. Nature. 2017;545:452–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature22367.
Pauken KE, Godec J, Odorizzi PM, Brown KE, Yates KB, Ngiow SF, et al. The PD-1 pathway regulates development and function of memory CD8(+) T cells following respiratory viral infection. Cell Rep. 2020;31:107827. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2020.107827.
Hui E, Cheung J, Zhu J, Su X, Taylor MJ, Wallweber HA, et al. T cell costimulatory receptor CD28 is a primary target for PD-1-mediated inhibition. Science. 2017;355:1428–33. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf1292.
Sheppard KA, Fitz LJ, Lee JM, Benander C, George JA, Wooters J, et al. PD-1 inhibits T-cell receptor induced phosphorylation of the ZAP70/CD3zeta signalosome and downstream signaling to PKCtheta. FEBS Lett. 2004;574:37–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.febslet.2004.07.083.
Odorizzi PM, Pauken KE, Paley MA, Sharpe A, Wherry EJ. Genetic absence of PD-1 promotes accumulation of terminally differentiated exhausted CD8+ T cells. J Exp Med. 2015;212:1125–37. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.20142237.
Attanasio J, Wherry EJ. Costimulatory and coinhibitory receptor pathways in infectious disease. Immunity. 2016;44:1052–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2016.04.022.
Esensten JH, Helou YA, Chopra G, Weiss A, Bluestone JA. CD28 costimulation: from mechanism to therapy. Immunity. 2016;44:973–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2016.04.020.
Kamphorst AO, Wieland A, Nasti T, Yang S, Zhang R, Barber DL, et al. Rescue of exhausted CD8 T cells by PD-1-targeted therapies is CD28-dependent. Science. 2017;355:1423–7. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf0683.
Brooks DG, Trifilo MJ, Edelmann KH, Teyton L, McGavern DB, Oldstone MB. Interleukin-10 determines viral clearance or persistence in vivo. Nat Med. 2006;12:1301–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm1492.
Ni G, Wang T, Walton S, Zhu B, Chen S, Wu X, et al. Manipulating IL-10 signalling blockade for better immunotherapy. Cell Immunol. 2015;293:126–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cellimm.2014.12.012.
Tinoco R, Alcalde V, Yang Y, Sauer K, Zuniga EI. Cell-intrinsic transforming growth factor-beta signaling mediates virus-specific CD8+ T cell deletion and viral persistence in vivo. Immunity. 2009;31:145–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2009.06.015.
Patsoukis N, Bardhan K, Chatterjee P, Sari D, Liu B, Bell LN, et al. PD-1 alters T-cell metabolic reprogramming by inhibiting glycolysis and promoting lipolysis and fatty acid oxidation. Nat Commun. 2015;6:6692. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms7692.
Le Bourgeois T, Strauss L, Aksoylar HI, Daneshmandi S, Seth P, Patsoukis N, et al. Targeting T cell metabolism for improvement of cancer immunotherapy. Front Oncol. 2018;8:237. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2018.00237.
Paley MA, Kroy DC, Odorizzi PM, Johnnidis JB, Dolfi DV, Barnett BE, et al. Progenitor and terminal subsets of CD8+ T cells cooperate to contain chronic viral infection. Science. 2012;338:1220–5. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1229620.
Siddiqui I, Schaeuble K, Chennupati V, Fuertes Marraco SA, Calderon-Copete S, Pais Ferreira D, et al. Intratumoral Tcf1(+)PD-1(+)CD8(+) T cells with stem-like properties promote tumor control in response to vaccination and checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. Immunity. 2019;50:195–211.e10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2018.12.021.
Miller BC, Sen DR, Al Abosy R, Bi K, Virkud YV, LaFleur MW, et al. Subsets of exhausted CD8(+) T cells differentially mediate tumor control and respond to checkpoint blockade. Nat Immunol. 2019;20:326–36. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-019-0312-6.
Tsui C, Kretschmer L, Rapelius S, Gabriel SS, Chisanga D, Knöpper K, et al. MYB orchestrates T cell exhaustion and response to checkpoint inhibition. Nature. 2022;609:354–60. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05105-1.
Beltra JC, Manne S, Abdel-Hakeem MS, Kurachi M, Giles JR, Chen Z, et al. Developmental relationships of four exhausted CD8(+) T cell subsets reveals underlying transcriptional and epigenetic landscape control mechanisms. Immunity. 2020;52:825–41.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2020.04.014.
Schenkel JM, Herbst RH, Canner D, Li A, Hillman M, Shanahan SL, et al. Conventional type I dendritic cells maintain a reservoir of proliferative tumor-antigen specific TCF-1(+) CD8(+) T cells in tumor-draining lymph nodes. Immunity. 2021;54:2338–2353.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2021.08.026.
Huang Q, Wu X, Wang Z, Chen X, Wang L, Lu Y, et al. The primordial differentiation of tumor-specific memory CD8(+) T cells as bona fide responders to PD-1/PD-L1 blockade in draining lymph nodes. Cell. 2022;185:4049–4066.e25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2022.09.020.
Prokhnevska N, Cardenas MA, Valanparambil RM, Sobierajska E, Barwick BG, Jansen C, et al. CD8(+) T cell activation in cancer comprises an initial activation phase in lymph nodes followed by effector differentiation within the tumor. Immunity. 2023;56:107–24.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2022.12.002.
Khan O, Giles JR, McDonald S, Manne S, Ngiow SF, Patel KP, et al. TOX transcriptionally and epigenetically programs CD8(+) T cell exhaustion. Nature. 2019;571:211–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1325-x.
Scott AC, Dündar F, Zumbo P, Chandran SS, Klebanoff CA, Shakiba M, et al. TOX is a critical regulator of tumour-specific T cell differentiation. Nature. 2019;571:270–4. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1324-y.
Chen J, López-Moyado IF, Seo H, Lio CJ, Hempleman LJ, Sekiya T, et al. NR4A transcription factors limit CAR T cell function in solid tumours. Nature. 2019;567:530–4. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-0985-x.
Scott-Browne JP, López-Moyado IF, Trifari S, Wong V, Chavez L, Rao A, et al. Dynamic changes in chromatin accessibility occur in CD8(+) T cells responding to viral infection. Immunity. 2016;45:1327–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2016.10.028.
Martinez GJ, Pereira RM, Äijö T, Kim EY, Marangoni F, Pipkin ME, et al. The transcription factor NFAT promotes exhaustion of activated CD8+ T cells. Immunity. 2015;42:265–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2015.01.006.
Moffett HF, Cartwright A, Kim HJ, Godec J, Pyrdol J, Äijö T, et al. The microRNA miR-31 inhibits CD8(+) T cell function in chronic viral infection. Nat Immunol. 2017;18:791–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.3755.
Man K, Gabriel SS, Liao Y, Gloury R, Preston S, Henstridge DC, et al. Transcription factor IRF4 promotes CD8(+) T cell exhaustion and limits the development of memory-like T cells during chronic infection. Immunity. 2017;47:1129–41.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2017.11.021.
Collier JL, Weiss SA, Pauken KE, Sen DR, Sharpe AH. Not-so-opposite ends of the spectrum: CD8(+) T cell dysfunction across chronic infection, cancer and autoimmunity. Nat Immunol. 2021;22:809–19. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-021-00949-7.
Lu YJ, Barreira-Silva P, Boyce S, Powers J, Cavallo K, Behar SM. CD4 T cell help prevents CD8 T cell exhaustion and promotes control of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection. Cell Rep. 2021;36:109696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2021.109696.
Topchyan P, Xin G, Chen Y, Zheng S, Burns R, Shen J, et al. Harnessing the IL-21-BATF pathway in the CD8(+) T cell anti-tumor response. Cancers. 2021;13. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13061263.
Yamauchi T, Hoki T, Oba T, Saito H, Attwood K, Sabel MS, et al. CX3CR1-CD8+ T cells are critical in antitumor efficacy but functionally suppressed in the tumor microenvironment. JCI Insight. 2020;5. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.133920.
Chen Y, Zander R, Khatun A, Schauder DM, Cui W. Transcriptional and epigenetic regulation of effector and memory CD8 T cell differentiation. Front Immunol. 2018;9:2826. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2018.02826.
Li J, He Y, Hao J, Ni L, Dong C. High levels of eomes promote exhaustion of anti-tumor CD8(+) T cells. Front Immunol. 2018;9:2981. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2018.02981.
Xing S, Li F, Zeng Z, Zhao Y, Yu S, Shan Q, et al. Tcf1 and Lef1 transcription factors establish CD8(+) T cell identity through intrinsic HDAC activity. Nat Immunol. 2016;17:695–703. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.3456.
Zhou X, Yu S, Zhao DM, Harty JT, Badovinac VP, Xue HH. Differentiation and persistence of memory CD8(+) T cells depend on T cell factor 1. Immunity. 2010;33:229–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2010.08.002.
Kim MV, Ouyang W, Liao W, Zhang MQ, Li MO. The transcription factor Foxo1 controls central-memory CD8+ T cell responses to infection. Immunity. 2013;39:286–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2013.07.013.
Utzschneider DT, Delpoux A, Wieland D, Huang X, Lai CY, Hofmann M, et al. Active maintenance of T cell memory in acute and chronic viral infection depends on continuous expression of FOXO1. Cell Rep. 2018;22:3454–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2018.03.020.
Delpoux A, Marcel N, Hess Michelini R, Katayama CD, Allison KA, Glass CK, et al. FOXO1 constrains activation and regulates senescence in CD8 T cells. Cell Rep. 2021;34:108674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2020.108674.
Odagiu L, May J, Boulet S, Baldwin TA, Labrecque N. Role of the orphan nuclear receptor NR4A family in T-cell biology. Front Endocrinol. 2020;11:624122. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2020.624122.
Seo H, Chen J, González-Avalos E, Samaniego-Castruita D, Das A, Wang YH, et al. TOX and TOX2 transcription factors cooperate with NR4A transcription factors to impose CD8(+) T cell exhaustion. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2019;116:12410–5. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1905675116.
Ghoneim HE, Fan Y, Moustaki A, Abdelsamed HA, Dash P, Dogra P, et al. De novo epigenetic programs inhibit PD-1 blockade-mediated T cell rejuvenation. Cell. 2017;170:142–57.e19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.06.007.
Pauken KE, Sammons MA, Odorizzi PM, Manne S, Godec J, Khan O, et al. Epigenetic stability of exhausted T cells limits durability of reinvigoration by PD-1 blockade. Science. 2016;354:1160–5. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaf2807.
Sen DR, Kaminski J, Barnitz RA, Kurachi M, Gerdemann U, Yates KB, et al. The epigenetic landscape of T cell exhaustion. Science. 2016;354:1165–9. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aae0491.
Zhang F, Zhou X, DiSpirito JR, Wang C, Wang Y, Shen H. Epigenetic manipulation restores functions of defective CD8(+) T cells from chronic viral infection. Mol Ther. 2014;22:1698–706. https://doi.org/10.1038/mt.2014.91.
Chang CH, Curtis JD, Maggi LB Jr, Faubert B, Villarino AV, O’Sullivan D, et al. Posttranscriptional control of T cell effector function by aerobic glycolysis. Cell. 2013;153:1239–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2013.05.016.
Smith-Garvin JE, Koretzky GA, Jordan MS. T cell activation. Annu Rev Immunol. 2009;27:591–619. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.immunol.021908.132706.
Chen L, Flies DB. Molecular mechanisms of T cell co-stimulation and co-inhibition. Nat Rev Immunol. 2013;13:227–42. https://doi.org/10.1038/nri3405.
Shyer JA, Flavell RA, Bailis W. Metabolic signaling in T cells. Cell Res. 2020;30:649–59. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41422-020-0379-5.
Wang R, Dillon CP, Shi LZ, Milasta S, Carter R, Finkelstein D, et al. The transcription factor Myc controls metabolic reprogramming upon T lymphocyte activation. Immunity. 2011;35:871–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2011.09.021.
Møller SH, Hsueh PC, Yu YR, Zhang L, Ho PC. Metabolic programs tailor T cell immunity in viral infection, cancer, and aging. Cell Metab. 2022;34:378–95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2022.02.003.
Pearce EL, Poffenberger MC, Chang CH, Jones RG. Fueling immunity: insights into metabolism and lymphocyte function. Science. 2013;342:1242454. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1242454.
van der Windt GJ, Everts B, Chang CH, Curtis JD, Freitas TC, Amiel E, et al. Mitochondrial respiratory capacity is a critical regulator of CD8+ T cell memory development. Immunity. 2012;36:68–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2011.12.007.
van der Windt GJ, O’Sullivan D, Everts B, Huang SC, Buck MD, Curtis JD, et al. CD8 memory T cells have a bioenergetic advantage that underlies their rapid recall ability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:14336–41. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1221740110.
Pearce EL, Walsh MC, Cejas PJ, Harms GM, Shen H, Wang LS, et al. Enhancing CD8 T-cell memory by modulating fatty acid metabolism. Nature. 2009;460:103–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08097.
O’Sullivan D, van der Windt GJ, Huang SC, Curtis JD, Chang CH, Buck MD, et al. Memory CD8(+) T cells use cell-intrinsic lipolysis to support the metabolic programming necessary for development. Immunity. 2014;41:75–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2014.06.005.
Puleston DJ, Villa M, Pearce EL. Ancillary activity: beyond core metabolism in immune cells. Cell Metab. 2017;26:131–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2017.06.019.
Cui G, Staron MM, Gray SM, Ho PC, Amezquita RA, Wu J, et al. IL-7-induced glycerol transport and TAG synthesis promotes memory CD8+ T cell longevity. Cell. 2015;161:750–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.03.021.
Phan AT, Doedens AL, Palazon A, Tyrakis PA, Cheung KP, Johnson RS, et al. Constitutive glycolytic metabolism supports CD8(+) T cell effector memory differentiation during viral infection. Immunity. 2016;45:1024–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2016.10.017.
Xu Y, Chaudhury A, Zhang M, Savoldo B, Metelitsa LS, Rodgers J, et al. Glycolysis determines dichotomous regulation of T cell subsets in hypoxia. J Clin Invest. 2016;126:2678–88. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci85834.
Atkuri KR, Herzenberg LA, Herzenberg LA. Culturing at atmospheric oxygen levels impacts lymphocyte function. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2005;102:3756–9. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0409910102.
Caldwell CC, Kojima H, Lukashev D, Armstrong J, Farber M, Apasov SG, et al. Differential effects of physiologically relevant hypoxic conditions on T lymphocyte development and effector functions. J Immunol. 2001;167:6140–9. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.167.11.6140.
Hasan F, Chiu Y, Shaw RM, Wang J, Yee C. Hypoxia acts as an environmental cue for the human tissue-resident memory T cell differentiation program. JCI Insight. 2021;6. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.138970.
Pan Y, Tian T, Park CO, Lofftus SY, Mei S, Liu X, et al. Survival of tissue-resident memory T cells requires exogenous lipid uptake and metabolism. Nature. 2017;543:252–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature21379.
Frizzell H, Fonseca R, Christo SN, Evrard M, Cruz-Gomez S, Zanluqui NG, et al. Organ-specific isoform selection of fatty acid-binding proteins in tissue-resident lymphocytes. Sci Immunol. 2020;5. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciimmunol.aay9283.
Konjar Š, Frising UC, Ferreira C, Hinterleitner R, Mayassi T, Zhang Q, et al. Mitochondria maintain controlled activation state of epithelial-resident T lymphocytes. Sci Immunol. 2018;3. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciimmunol.aan2543.
Konjar Š, Ferreira C, Carvalho FS, Figueiredo-Campos P, Fanczal J, Ribeiro S, et al. Intestinal tissue-resident T cell activation depends on metabolite availability. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2022;119:e2202144119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2202144119.
Chen X, Jaiswal A, Costliow Z, Herbst P, Creasey EA, Oshiro-Rapley N, et al. pH sensing controls tissue inflammation by modulating cellular metabolism and endo-lysosomal function of immune cells. Nat Immunol. 2022;23:1063–75. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-022-01231-0.
McKinney EF, Smith KGC. Metabolic exhaustion in infection, cancer and autoimmunity. Nat Immunol. 2018;19:213–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-018-0045-y.
Schurich A, Pallett LJ, Jajbhay D, Wijngaarden J, Otano I, Gill US, et al. Distinct metabolic requirements of exhausted and functional virus-specific CD8 T cells in the same host. Cell Rep. 2016;16:1243–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.06.078.
Bengsch B, Johnson AL, Kurachi M, Odorizzi PM, Pauken KE, Attanasio J, et al. Bioenergetic insufficiencies due to metabolic alterations regulated by the inhibitory receptor PD-1 are an early driver of CD8(+) T cell exhaustion. Immunity. 2016;45:358–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2016.07.008.
Vardhana SA, Hwee MA, Berisa M, Wells DK, Yost KE, King B, et al. Impaired mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation limits the self-renewal of T cells exposed to persistent antigen. Nat Immunol. 2020;21:1022–33. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-020-0725-2.
Yu YR, Imrichova H, Wang H, Chao T, Xiao Z, Gao M, et al. Disturbed mitochondrial dynamics in CD8(+) TILs reinforce T cell exhaustion. Nat Immunol. 2020;21:1540–51. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-020-0793-3.
Scharping NE, Rivadeneira DB, Menk AV, Vignali P, Ford BR, Rittenhouse NL, et al. Mitochondrial stress induced by continuous stimulation under hypoxia rapidly drives T cell exhaustion. Nat Immunol. 2021;22:205–15. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-020-00834-9.
Reina-Campos M, Scharping NE, Goldrath AW. CD8(+) T cell metabolism in infection and cancer. Nat Rev Immunol. 2021;21:718–38. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41577-021-00537-8.
Saravia J, Raynor JL, Chapman NM, Lim SA, Chi H. Signaling networks in immunometabolism. Cell Res. 2020;30:328–42. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41422-020-0301-1.
Mossmann D, Park S, Hall MN. mTOR signalling and cellular metabolism are mutual determinants in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2018;18:744–57. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-018-0074-8.
Heitman J, Movva NR, Hall MN. Targets for cell cycle arrest by the immunosuppressant rapamycin in yeast. Science. 1991;253:905–9. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1715094.
Iadevaia V, Liu R, Proud CG. mTORC1 signaling controls multiple steps in ribosome biogenesis. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2014;36:113–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semcdb.2014.08.004.
Holz MK, Ballif BA, Gygi SP, Blenis J. mTOR and S6K1 mediate assembly of the translation preinitiation complex through dynamic protein interchange and ordered phosphorylation events. Cell. 2005;123:569–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2005.10.024.
Ben-Sahra I, Howell JJ, Asara JM, Manning BD. Stimulation of de novo pyrimidine synthesis by growth signaling through mTOR and S6K1. Science. 2013;339:1323–8. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1228792.
Ben-Sahra I, Hoxhaj G, Ricoult SJH, Asara JM, Manning BD. mTORC1 induces purine synthesis through control of the mitochondrial tetrahydrofolate cycle. Science. 2016;351:728–33. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad0489.
Düvel K, Yecies JL, Menon S, Raman P, Lipovsky AI, Souza AL, et al. Activation of a metabolic gene regulatory network downstream of mTOR complex 1. Mol Cell. 2010;39:171–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2010.06.022.
Kim J, Kundu M, Viollet B, Guan KL. AMPK and mTOR regulate autophagy through direct phosphorylation of Ulk1. Nat Cell Biol. 2011;13:132–41. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb2152.
Kim DH, Sarbassov DD, Ali SM, King JE, Latek RR, Erdjument-Bromage H, et al. mTOR interacts with raptor to form a nutrient-sensitive complex that signals to the cell growth machinery. Cell. 2002;110:163–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(02)00808-5.
Kim DH, Sarbassov DD, Ali SM, Latek RR, Guntur KV, Erdjument-Bromage H, et al. GbetaL, a positive regulator of the rapamycin-sensitive pathway required for the nutrient-sensitive interaction between raptor and mTOR. Mol Cell. 2003;11:895–904. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1097-2765(03)00114-x.
Sarbassov DD, Ali SM, Kim DH, Guertin DA, Latek RR, Erdjument-Bromage H, et al. Rictor, a novel binding partner of mTOR, defines a rapamycin-insensitive and raptor-independent pathway that regulates the cytoskeleton. Curr Biol. 2004;14:1296–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2004.06.054.
Jacinto E, Loewith R, Schmidt A, Lin S, Rüegg MA, Hall A, et al. Mammalian TOR complex 2 controls the actin cytoskeleton and is rapamycin insensitive. Nat Cell Biol. 2004;6:1122–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb1183.
Sarbassov DD, Guertin DA, Ali SM, Sabatini DM. Phosphorylation and regulation of Akt/PKB by the rictor-mTOR complex. Science. 2005;307:1098–101. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1106148.
Gonzalez A, Hall MN. Nutrient sensing and TOR signaling in yeast and mammals. EMBO J. 2017;36:397–408. https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201696010.
Bar-Peled L, Sabatini DM. Regulation of mTORC1 by amino acids. Trends Cell Biol. 2014;24:400–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tcb.2014.03.003.
Sancak Y, Bar-Peled L, Zoncu R, Markhard AL, Nada S, Sabatini DM. Ragulator-Rag complex targets mTORC1 to the lysosomal surface and is necessary for its activation by amino acids. Cell. 2010;141:290–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2010.02.024.
Sancak Y, Peterson TR, Shaul YD, Lindquist RA, Thoreen CC, Bar-Peled L, et al. The Rag GTPases bind raptor and mediate amino acid signaling to mTORC1. Science. 2008;320:1496–501. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1157535.
Sarbassov DD, Sabatini DM. Redox regulation of the nutrient-sensitive raptor-mTOR pathway and complex. J Biol Chem. 2005;280:39505–9. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M506096200.
Kato M, Yang YS, Sutter BM, Wang Y, McKnight SL, Tu BP. Redox state controls phase separation of the yeast ataxin-2 protein via reversible oxidation of its methionine-rich low-complexity domain. Cell. 2019;177:711–21.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.02.044.
Yoshida S, Hong S, Suzuki T, Nada S, Mannan AM, Wang J, et al. Redox regulates mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1) activity by modulating the TSC1/TSC2-Rheb GTPase pathway. J Biol Chem. 2011;286:32651–60. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M111.238014.
Bar-Peled L, Chantranupong L, Cherniack AD, Chen WW, Ottina KA, Grabiner BC, et al. A Tumor suppressor complex with GAP activity for the Rag GTPases that signal amino acid sufficiency to mTORC1. Science. 2013;340:1100–6. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1232044.
Budanov AV, Karin M. p53 target genes sestrin1 and sestrin2 connect genotoxic stress and mTOR signaling. Cell. 2008;134:451–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2008.06.028.
Wolfson RL, Chantranupong L, Saxton RA, Shen K, Scaria SM, Cantor JR, et al. Sestrin2 is a leucine sensor for the mTORC1 pathway. Science. 2016;351:43–8. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aab2674.
Cangelosi AL, Puszynska AM, Roberts JM, Armani A, Nguyen TP, Spinelli JB, et al. Zonated leucine sensing by Sestrin-mTORC1 in the liver controls the response to dietary leucine. Science. 2022;377:47–56. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abi9547.
Chantranupong L, Scaria SM, Saxton RA, Gygi MP, Shen K, Wyant GA, et al. The CASTOR proteins are arginine sensors for the mTORC1 pathway. Cell. 2016;165:153–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.02.035.
Gu X, Orozco JM, Saxton RA, Condon KJ, Liu GY, Krawczyk PA, et al. SAMTOR is an S-adenosylmethionine sensor for the mTORC1 pathway. Science. 2017;358:813–8. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aao3265.
Betz C, Stracka D, Prescianotto-Baschong C, Frieden M, Demaurex N, Hall MN. Feature Article: mTOR complex 2-Akt signaling at mitochondria-associated endoplasmic reticulum membranes (MAM) regulates mitochondrial physiology. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:12526–34. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1302455110.
Scaiola A, Mangia F, Imseng S, Boehringer D, Berneiser K, Shimobayashi M, et al. The 3.2-A resolution structure of human mTORC2. Sci Adv. 2020;6. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abc1251.
Yu Z, Chen J, Takagi E, Wang F, Saha B, Liu X, et al. Interactions between mTORC2 core subunits Rictor and mSin1 dictate selective and context-dependent phosphorylation of substrate kinases SGK1 and Akt. J Biol Chem. 2022;298:102288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2022.102288.
Tatebe H, Murayama S, Yonekura T, Hatano T, Richter D, Furuya T, et al. Substrate specificity of TOR complex 2 is determined by a ubiquitin-fold domain of the Sin1 subunit. Elife. 2017;6. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.19594.
Liu P, Gan W, Chin YR, Ogura K, Guo J, Zhang J, et al. PtdIns(3,4,5)P3-dependent activation of the mTORC2 kinase complex. Cancer Discov. 2015;5:1194–209. https://doi.org/10.1158/2159-8290.CD-15-0460.
Humphrey SJ, Yang G, Yang P, Fazakerley DJ, Stöckli J, Yang JY, et al. Dynamic adipocyte phosphoproteome reveals that Akt directly regulates mTORC2. Cell Metab. 2013;17:1009–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmet.2013.04.010.
Yang G, Murashige DS, Humphrey SJ, James DE. A positive feedback loop between Akt and mTORC2 via SIN1 phosphorylation. Cell Rep. 2015;12:937–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2015.07.016.
Ikenoue T, Inoki K, Yang Q, Zhou X, Guan KL. Essential function of TORC2 in PKC and Akt turn motif phosphorylation, maturation and signalling. EMBO J. 2008;27:1919–31. https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2008.119.
Facchinetti V, Ouyang W, Wei H, Soto N, Lazorchak A, Gould C, et al. The mammalian target of rapamycin complex 2 controls folding and stability of Akt and protein kinase C. EMBO J. 2008;27:1932–43. https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2008.120.
Baffi TR, Lordén G, Wozniak JM, Feichtner A, Yeung W, Kornev AP, et al. mTORC2 controls the activity of PKC and Akt by phosphorylating a conserved TOR interaction motif. Sci Signal. 2021;14. https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.abe4509.
Artinian N, Cloninger C, Holmes B, Benavides-Serrato A, Bashir T, Gera J. Phosphorylation of the hippo pathway component AMOTL2 by the mTORC2 kinase promotes YAP signaling, resulting in enhanced glioblastoma growth and invasiveness. J Biol Chem. 2015;290:19387–401. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M115.656587.
Sciarretta S, Zhai P, Maejima Y, Del Re DP, Nagarajan N, Yee D, et al. mTORC2 regulates cardiac response to stress by inhibiting MST1. Cell Rep. 2015;11:125–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2015.03.010.
Holmes B, Benavides-Serrato A, Saunders JT, Kumar S, Nishimura RN, Gera J. mTORC2-mediated direct phosphorylation regulates YAP activity promoting glioblastoma growth and invasive characteristics. Neoplasia. 2021;23:951–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neo.2021.07.005.
Yu Y, Yoon SO, Poulogiannis G, Yang Q, Ma XM, Villén J, et al. Phosphoproteomic analysis identifies Grb10 as an mTORC1 substrate that negatively regulates insulin signaling. Science. 2011;332:1322–6. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1199484.
Inoki K, Li Y, Zhu T, Wu J, Guan KL. TSC2 is phosphorylated and inhibited by Akt and suppresses mTOR signalling. Nat Cell Biol. 2002;4:648–57. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb839.
Chen CC, Jeon SM, Bhaskar PT, Nogueira V, Sundararajan D, Tonic I, et al. FoxOs inhibit mTORC1 and activate Akt by inducing the expression of Sestrin3 and Rictor. Dev Cell. 2010;18:592–604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2010.03.008.
Duran RV, Hall MN. Regulation of TOR by small GTPases. EMBO Rep. 2012;13:121–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/embor.2011.257.
Sancak Y, Thoreen CC, Peterson TR, Lindquist RA, Kang SA, Spooner E, et al. PRAS40 is an insulin-regulated inhibitor of the mTORC1 protein kinase. Mol Cell. 2007;25:903–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2007.03.003.
Saci A, Cantley LC, Carpenter CL. Rac1 regulates the activity of mTORC1 and mTORC2 and controls cellular size. Mol Cell. 2011;42:50–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2011.03.017.
Araki K, Turner AP, Shaffer VO, Gangappa S, Keller SA, Bachmann MF, et al. mTOR regulates memory CD8 T-cell differentiation. Nature. 2009;460:108–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08155.
Rao RR, Li Q, Odunsi K, Shrikant PA. The mTOR kinase determines effector versus memory CD8+ T cell fate by regulating the expression of transcription factors T-bet and Eomesodermin. Immunity. 2010;32:67–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2009.10.010.
Li Q, Rao RR, Araki K, Pollizzi K, Odunsi K, Powell JD, et al. A central role for mTOR kinase in homeostatic proliferation induced CD8+ T cell memory and tumor immunity. Immunity. 2011;34:541–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2011.04.006.
Pollizzi KN, Patel CH, Sun IH, Oh MH, Waickman AT, Wen J, et al. mTORC1 and mTORC2 selectively regulate CD8+ T cell differentiation. J Clin Invest. 2015;125:2090–108. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci77746.
Shrestha S, Yang K, Wei J, Karmaus PW, Neale G, Chi H. Tsc1 promotes the differentiation of memory CD8+ T cells via orchestrating the transcriptional and metabolic programs. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111:14858–63. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1404264111.
Zhang L, Tschumi BO, Lopez-Mejia IC, Oberle SG, Meyer M, Samson G, et al. Mammalian target of rapamycin complex 2 controls CD8 T cell memory differentiation in a Foxo1-dependent manner. Cell Rep. 2016;14:1206–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2015.12.095.
Patel CH, Heikamp EB, Xu W, Sun IH, Oh MH, Sun IM, et al. Cutting edge: mTORC2 regulates CD8+ effector and memory T cell differentiation through serum and glucocorticoid kinase 1. J Immunol. 2022;209:2287–91. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.2100669.
Sowell RT, Rogozinska M, Nelson CE, Vezys V, Marzo AL. Cutting edge: generation of effector cells that localize to mucosal tissues and form resident memory CD8 T cells is controlled by mTOR. J Immunol. 2014;193:2067–71. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1400074.
Zhou AC, Batista NV, Watts TH. 4-1BB regulates effector CD8 T cell accumulation in the lung tissue through a TRAF1-, mTOR-, and antigen-dependent mechanism to enhance tissue-resident memory T cell formation during respiratory influenza infection. J Immunol. 2019;202:2482–92. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1800795.
Sowell RT, Goldufsky JW, Rogozinska M, Quiles Z, Cao Y, Castillo EF, et al. IL-15 complexes induce migration of resting memory CD8 T cells into mucosal tissues. J Immunol. 2017;199:2536–46. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1501638.
Staron MM, Gray SM, Marshall HD, Parish IA, Chen JH, Perry CJ, et al. The transcription factor FoxO1 sustains expression of the inhibitory receptor PD-1 and survival of antiviral CD8(+) T cells during chronic infection. Immunity. 2014;41:802–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2014.10.013.
Gabriel SS, Tsui C, Chisanga D, Weber F, Llano-León M, Gubser PM, et al. Transforming growth factor-β-regulated mTOR activity preserves cellular metabolism to maintain long-term T cell responses in chronic infection. Immunity. 2021;54:1698–714.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2021.06.007.
Ando S, Perkins CM, Sajiki Y, Chastain C, Valanparambil RM, Wieland A, et al. mTOR regulates T cell exhaustion and PD-1-targeted immunotherapy response during chronic viral infection. J Clin Invest. 2023;133. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI160025.
Pollizzi KN, Patel CH, Sun IH, Oh MH, Waickman AT, Wen J, et al. mTORC1 and mTORC2 selectively regulate CD8(+) T cell differentiation. J Clin Invest. 2015;125:2090–108. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI77746.
Collins N, Han SJ, Enamorado M, Link VM, Huang B, Moseman EA, et al. The bone marrow protects and optimizes immunological memory during dietary restriction. Cell. 2019;178:1088–101.e15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2019.07.049.
Rong D, Wang Y, Liu L, Cao H, Huang T, Liu H, et al. GLIS1 intervention enhances anti-PD1 therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma by targeting SGK1-STAT3-PD1 pathway. J Immunother Cancer. 2023;11. https://doi.org/10.1136/jitc-2022-005126.
Takemoto N, Intlekofer AM, Northrup JT, Wherry EJ, Reiner SL. Cutting Edge: IL-12 inversely regulates T-bet and eomesodermin expression during pathogen-induced CD8+ T cell differentiation. J Immunol. 2006;177:7515–9. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.177.11.7515.
Chornoguz O, Hagan RS, Haile A, Arwood ML, Gamper CJ, Banerjee A, et al. mTORC1 promotes T-bet phosphorylation to regulate Th1 differentiation. J Immunol. 2017;198:3939–48. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1601078.
Gabriel SS, Tsui C, Chisanga D, Weber F, Llano-León M, Gubser PM, et al. Transforming growth factor-beta-regulated mTOR activity preserves cellular metabolism to maintain long-term T cell responses in chronic infection. Immunity. 2021;54:1698–714.e5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2021.06.007.
Hess Michelini R, Doedens AL, Goldrath AW, Hedrick SM. Differentiation of CD8 memory T cells depends on Foxo1. J Exp Med. 2013;210:1189–200. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.20130392.
Rao RR, Li Q, Gubbels Bupp MR, Shrikant PA. Transcription factor Foxo1 represses T-bet-mediated effector functions and promotes memory CD8(+) T cell differentiation. Immunity. 2012;36:374–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2012.01.015.
Tejera MM, Kim EH, Sullivan JA, Plisch EH, Suresh M. FoxO1 controls effector-to-memory transition and maintenance of functional CD8 T cell memory. J Immunol. 2013;191:187–99. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1300331.
Allie SR, Zhang W, Fuse S, Usherwood EJ. Programmed death 1 regulates development of central memory CD8 T cells after acute viral infection. J Immunol. 2011;186:6280–6. https://doi.org/10.4049/jimmunol.1003870.
Giles JR, Ngiow SF, Manne S, Baxter AE, Khan O, Wang P, et al. Shared and distinct biological circuits in effector, memory and exhausted CD8(+) T cells revealed by temporal single-cell transcriptomics and epigenetics. Nat Immunol. 2022;23:1600–13. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-022-01338-4.
Preston GC, Sinclair LV, Kaskar A, Hukelmann JL, Navarro MN, Ferrero I, et al. Single cell tuning of Myc expression by antigen receptor signal strength and interleukin-2 in T lymphocytes. EMBO J. 2015;34:2008–24. https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201490252.
Verbist KC, Guy CS, Milasta S, Liedmann S, Kamiński MM, Wang R, et al. Metabolic maintenance of cell asymmetry following division in activated T lymphocytes. Nature. 2016;532:389–93. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17442.
Howden A, Hukelmann JL, Brenes A, Spinelli L, Sinclair LV, Lamond AI, et al. Quantitative analysis of T cell proteomes and environmental sensors during T cell differentiation. Nat Immunol. 2019;20:1542–54. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41590-019-0495-x.
Gubser PM, Bantug GR, Razik L, Fischer M, Dimeloe S, Hoenger G, et al. Rapid effector function of memory CD8+ T cells requires an immediate-early glycolytic switch. Nat Immunol. 2013;14:1064–72. https://doi.org/10.1038/ni.2687.
Bantug GR, Fischer M, Grählert J, Balmer ML, Unterstab G, Develioglu L, et al. Mitochondria-endoplasmic reticulum contact sites function as immunometabolic hubs that orchestrate the rapid recall response of memory CD8(+) T cells. Immunity. 2018;48:542–55.e6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.immuni.2018.02.012.
Chen Y, Zhou X. Research progress of mTOR inhibitors. Eur J Med Chem. 2020;208:112820. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejmech.2020.112820.
Nian Z, Zheng X, Dou Y, Du X, Zhou L, Fu B, et al. Rapamycin pretreatment rescues the bone marrow AML cell elimination capacity of CAR-T cells. Clin Cancer Res. 2021;27:6026–38. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.Ccr-21-0452.
Alizadeh D, Wong RA, Yang X, Wang D, Pecoraro JR, Kuo CF, et al. IL15 enhances CAR-T cell antitumor activity by reducing mTORC1 activity and preserving their stem cell memory phenotype. Cancer Immunol Res. 2019;7:759–72. https://doi.org/10.1158/2326-6066.Cir-18-0466.
Wang Y, You S, Su S, Yeon A, Lo EM, Kim S, et al. Cholesterol-lowering intervention decreases mTOR complex 2 signaling and enhances antitumor immunity. Clin Cancer Res. 2022;28:414–24. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.Ccr-21-1535.
Kalia V, Yuzefpolskiy Y, Vegaraju A, Xiao H, Baumann F, Jatav S, et al. Metabolic regulation by PD-1 signaling promotes long-lived quiescent CD8 T cell memory in mice. Sci Transl Med. 2021;13:eaba6006. https://doi.org/10.1126/scitranslmed.aba6006.
We apologize to colleagues whose work we were unable to discuss and cite due to space limitations. This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (31930035, 91942311, and 32061143028 to BS; 32200738 to YC; 32170895 to NW), National Key R&D Program of China (2021YFA1301400 to BS), Shanghai Science and Technology Commission (20410714000, 20JC410100, and 22JC1402600 to BS; 22ZR1480700, 22QA1408000 to NW), Shanghai Frontiers Science Center of Cellular Homeostasis and Human Diseases to BS, China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2022T150422 to YC; 2021M692127 to HS), Nurture projects for basic research of Shanghai Chest Hospital (2021YNJCQ6 to XO). HS and YC are YuHe Postdoctoral Fellow at Shanghai Institute of Immunology. YC is also supported by fellowships from Shanghai Postdoctoral Excellence Program (2021250) and China International Postdoctoral Exchange Fellowship Program (Talent-Introduction Program). ZX is supported by the Zhi-Yuan Endowed fund from Shanghai Jiao Tong University.
The authors declare no competing interests.
The original online version of this article was revised: In this article the author name Yuheng Han was incorrectly written as Yuhen Han. The original article has been corrected.
About this article
Cite this article
Chen, Y., Xu, Z., Sun, H. et al. Regulation of CD8+ T memory and exhaustion by the mTOR signals. Cell Mol Immunol 20, 1023–1039 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41423-023-01064-3
This article is cited by
Cellular & Molecular Immunology (2023)