Abstract
Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) immunotherapy is a first-line treatment for selected cancers, yet the mechanisms of its efficacy remain incompletely understood. Furthermore, only a minority of patients with cancer benefit from ICB, and there is a lack of fully informative treatment response biomarkers. Selectively exploiting defects in DNA damage repair is also a standard treatment for cancer, spurred by enhanced understanding of the DNA damage response (DDR). DDR and ICB are closely linked—faulty DDR produces immunogenic cancer neoantigens that can increase the efficacy of ICB therapy, and tumour mutational burden is a good but imperfect biomarker for the response to ICB. DDR studies in ICB efficacy initially focused on contributions to neoantigen burden. However, a growing body of evidence suggests that ICB efficacy is complicated by the immunogenic effects of nucleic acids generated from exogenous DNA damage or endogenous processes such as DNA replication. Chemotherapy, radiation, or selective DDR inhibitors (such as PARP inhibitors) can generate aberrant nucleic acids to induce tumour immunogenicity independently of neoantigens. Independent of their functions in immunity, targets of immunotherapy such as cyclic GMP–AMP synthase (cGAS) or PD-L1 can crosstalk with DDR or the DNA repair machinery to influence the response to DNA-damaging agents. Here we review the rapidly evolving, multifaceted interfaces between DDR, nucleic acid immunogenicity and immunotherapy efficacy, focusing on ICB. Understanding these interrelated processes could explain ICB treatment failures and reveal novel exploitable therapeutic vulnerabilities in cancers. We conclude by addressing major unanswered questions and new research directions.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Decout, A., Katz, J. D., Venkatraman, S. & Ablasser, A. The cGAS–STING pathway as a therapeutic target in inflammatory diseases. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 21, 548–569 (2021).
Martincorena, I. & Campbell, P. J. Somatic mutation in cancer and normal cells. Science 349, 1483–1489 (2015).
Jackson, S. P. & Bartek, J. The DNA-damage response in human biology and disease. Nature 461, 1071–1078 (2009).
Gubin, M. M. et al. Checkpoint blockade cancer immunotherapy targets tumour-specific mutant antigens. Nature 515, 577–581 (2014). This is the initial demonstration that ICB efficacy involves reactivation of pre-existing T cells with specificity for mutant antigens expressed in tumour cells.
Schumacher, T. N. & Schreiber, R. D. Neoantigens in cancer immunotherapy. Science 348, 69–74 (2015).
Shankaran, V. et al. IFNγ and lymphocytes prevent primary tumour development and shape tumour immunogenicity. Nature 410, 1107–1111 (2001). This seminal paper helped guide current cancer immunology thinking by demonstrating adaptive immune-dependent prevention of carcinogen-induced cancers, overturning long-held misconceptions regarding the role of lymphocyes in anti-cancer immunity and paving the way to understanding immune editing.
Zitvogel, L., Tesniere, A. & Kroemer, G. Cancer despite immunosurveillance: immunoselection and immunosubversion. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 6, 715–727 (2006).
Alexandrov, L. B. et al. Signatures of mutational processes in human cancer. Nature 500, 415–421 (2013). This survey of somatic mutations across many human tumour types suggested that tumours with high mutational burden could respond better to ICB, helping understand the disparity in tumour ICB responses.
Hegde, P. S. & Chen, D. S. Top 10 challenges in cancer immunotherapy. Immunity 52, 17–35 (2020).
Topalian, S. L., Taube, J. M., Anders, R. A. & Pardoll, D. M. Mechanism-driven biomarkers to guide immune checkpoint blockade in cancer therapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 16, 275–287 (2016).
Haslam, A. & Prasad, V. Estimation of the percentage of US patients with cancer who are eligible for and respond to checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy drugs. JAMA Netw. Open 2, e192535 (2019).
Curiel, T. J. et al. Blockade of B7-H1 improves myeloid dendritic cell-mediated antitumor immunity. Nat. Med. 9, 562–567 (2003).
Barber, D. L. et al. Restoring function in exhausted CD8 T cells during chronic viral infection. Nature 439, 682–687 (2006).
Fleisher, A. S. et al. Hypermethylation of the hMLH1 gene promoter in human gastric cancers with microsatellite instability. Cancer Res. 59, 1090–1095 (1999).
Le, D. T. et al. PD-1 blockade in tumors with mismatch-repair deficiency. N. Engl. J. Med. 372, 2509–2520 (2015). To our knowledge, this phase II trial provided the first clinically meaningful evidence of improved anti-PD-1 (pembrolizimab) efficacy in DNA MMR-deficient versus MMR-proficient cancers.
Le, D. T. et al. Mismatch repair deficiency predicts response of solid tumors to PD-1 blockade. Science 357, 409–413 (2017). This clinical study examined activity of anti-PD-1 (pembrolizimab) across 12 different tumour types with MMR deficiency, and suggests MMR status as a tumour-agnostic ICB response biomarker.
Higgs, E. F., Bao, R., Hatogai, K. & Gajewski, T. F. Wilms tumor reveals DNA repair gene hyperexpression is linked to lack of tumor immune infiltration. J. Immunother. Cancer 10, e004797 (2022).
Lemery, S., Keegan, P. & Pazdur, R. First FDA approval agnostic of cancer site—when a biomarker defines the indication. N. Engl. J. Med. 377, 1409–1412 (2017).
Marabelle, A. et al. Association of tumour mutational burden with outcomes in patients with advanced solid tumours treated with pembrolizumab: prospective biomarker analysis of the multicohort, open-label, phase 2 KEYNOTE-158 study. Lancet Oncol. 21, 1353–1365 (2020).
Overman, M. J. et al. Nivolumab in patients with metastatic DNA mismatch repair-deficient or microsatellite instability-high colorectal cancer (CheckMate 142): an open-label, multicentre, phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol. 18, 1182–1191 (2017).
Sen, T. et al. Targeting DNA damage response promotes antitumor immunity through STING-mediated t-cell activation in small cell lung cancer. Cancer Discov. 9, 646–661 (2019).
Brahmer, J. R. et al. Safety and activity of anti-PD-L1 antibody in patients with advanced cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 366, 2455–2465 (2012).
Topalian, S. L. et al. Safety, activity, and immune correlates of anti-PD-1 antibody in cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 366, 2443–2454 (2012).
Harding, S. M. et al. Mitotic progression following DNA damage enables pattern recognition within micronuclei. Nature 548, 466–470 (2017). This work offers a clear demonstration that cytosolic DNA accumulation via micronuclei is the inciting event for cGAS–STING activation in cancer cells following exposure to DNA-damaging agents.
Kwon, J. & Bakhoum, S. F. The cytosolic DNA-sensing cGAS–STING pathway in cancer. Cancer Discov. 10, 26–39 (2020).
Xia, T., Konno, H., Ahn, J. & Barber, G. N. Deregulation of STING signaling in colorectal carcinoma constrains DNA damage responses and correlates with tumorigenesis. Cell Rep. 14, 282–297 (2016).
Tarsounas, M. & Sung, P. The antitumorigenic roles of BRCA1–BARD1 in DNA repair and replication. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 21, 284–299 (2020).
Zhao, B., Rothenberg, E., Ramsden, D. A. & Lieber, M. R. The molecular basis and disease relevance of non-homologous DNA end joining. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 21, 765–781 (2020).
Hatch, E. M., Fischer, A. H., Deerinck, T. J. & Hetzer, M. W. Catastrophic nuclear envelope collapse in cancer cell micronuclei. Cell 154, 47–60 (2013).
Bakhoum, S. F. et al. Chromosomal instability drives metastasis through a cytosolic DNA response. Nature 553, 467–472 (2018).
Hartlova, A. et al. DNA damage primes the type I interferon system via the cytosolic DNA sensor STING to promote anti-microbial innate immunity. Immunity 42, 332–343 (2015).
Heijink, A. M. et al. BRCA2 deficiency instigates cGAS-mediated inflammatory signaling and confers sensitivity to tumor necrosis factor-alpha-mediated cytotoxicity. Nat. Commun. 10, 100 (2019). This work shows that cancers with intrinsic DNA repair defects accumulate cGAS-activatable immunogenic DNA even in the absence of exogenous DNA damage.
Sakahira, H., Enari, M. & Nagata, S. Cleavage of CAD inhibitor in CAD activation and DNA degradation during apoptosis. Nature 391, 96–99 (1998).
Wang, Y. et al. eccDNAs are apoptotic products with high innate immunostimulatory activity. Nature 599, 308–314 (2021).
Erdal, E., Haider, S., Rehwinkel, J., Harris, A. L. & McHugh, P. J. A prosurvival DNA damage-induced cytoplasmic interferon response is mediated by end resection factors and is limited by Trex1. Genes Dev. 31, 353–369 (2017).
Maya-Mendoza, A. et al. High speed of fork progression induces DNA replication stress and genomic instability. Nature 559, 279–284 (2018).
Guan, J. et al. MLH1 deficiency-triggered DNA hyperexcision by exonuclease 1 activates the cGAS–STING pathway. Cancer Cell 39, 109–121.e5 (2021).
Vornholz, L. et al. Synthetic enforcement of STING signaling in cancer cells appropriates the immune microenvironment for checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Sci. Adv. 9, eadd8564 (2023).
Lu, C. et al. DNA sensing in mismatch repair-deficient tumor cells is essential for anti-tumor immunity. Cancer Cell 39, 96–108.e6 (2021). This study provides new insights into MMR-associated ICB efficacy: MMR-deficient tumours accumulate cytosolic DNA, which triggers cGAS–STING-driven anti-tumour immunity to drive ICB response independently of TMB.
Mankan, A. K. et al. Cytosolic RNA:DNA hybrids activate the cGAS–STING axis. EMBO J. 33, 2937–2946 (2014).
Zhang, X. et al. Attenuation of RNA polymerase II pausing mitigates BRCA1-associated R-loop accumulation and tumorigenesis. Nat. Commun. 8, 15908 (2017).
McGrail, D. J. et al. Replication stress response defects are associated with response to immune checkpoint blockade in nonhypermutated cancers. Sci. Transl Med. 13, eabe6201 (2021). This study demonstrates that MMR-proficient cancers experiencing high levels of DNA replication stress also accumulate cytosolic DNA to trigger intrinsic cGAS–STING and promote ICB responsiveness.
Chen, Y. A. et al. Extrachromosomal telomere repeat DNA is linked to ALT development via cGAS–STING DNA sensing pathway. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 24, 1124–1131 (2017).
Rivera, T., Haggblom, C., Cosconati, S. & Karlseder, J. A balance between elongation and trimming regulates telomere stability in stem cells. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 24, 30–39 (2017).
Li, B., Reddy, S. & Comai, L. Depletion of Ku70/80 reduces the levels of extrachromosomal telomeric circles and inhibits proliferation of ALT cells. Aging 3, 395–406 (2011).
Abdisalaam, S. et al. Dysfunctional telomeres trigger cellular senescence mediated by cyclic GMP-AMP synthase. J. Biol. Chem. 295, 11144–11160 (2020).
Mender, I. et al. Telomere stress potentiates STING-dependent anti-tumor immunity. Cancer Cell 38, 400–411.e6 (2020).
Segura-Bayona, S. et al. Tousled-like kinases suppress innate immune signaling triggered by alternative lengthening of telomeres. Cell Rep. 32, 107983 (2020).
Smith, J. A. STING, the endoplasmic reticulum, and mitochondria: is three a crowd or a conversation? Front. Immunol. 11, 611347 (2020).
Hu, M. et al. ATM inhibition enhances cancer immunotherapy by promoting mtDNA leakage and cGAS/STING activation. J. Clin. Invest. 131, e139333 (2021). This study demonstrates that mitochondrial DNA immunogenicty can be harnessed to improve cancer immunotherapy efficacy.
Li, Y. et al. The DNA repair nuclease MRE11A functions as a mitochondrial protector and prevents t cell pyroptosis and tissue inflammation. Cell Metab, 30, 477–492.e6 (2019).
Sage, J. M., Gildemeister, O. S. & Knight, K. L. Discovery of a novel function for human Rad51: maintenance of the mitochondrial genome. J. Biol. Chem. 285, 18984–18990 (2010).
Coene, E. D. et al. Phosphorylated BRCA1 is predominantly located in the nucleus and mitochondria. Mol. Biol. Cell 16, 997–1010 (2005).
Luzwick, J. W. et al. MRE11-dependent instability in mitochondrial DNA fork protection activates a cGAS immune signaling pathway. Sci. Adv. 7, eabf9441 (2021).
Michalski, S. et al. Structural basis for sequestration and autoinhibition of cGAS by chromatin. Nature 587, 678–682 (2020).
Guey, B. et al. BAF restricts cGAS on nuclear DNA to prevent innate immune activation. Science 369, 823–828 (2020).
Konno, H. et al. Suppression of STING signaling through epigenetic silencing and missense mutation impedes DNA damage mediated cytokine production. Oncogene 37, 2037–2051 (2018).
Kitajima, S. et al. Suppression of STING associated with LKB1 loss in KRAS-driven lung cancer. Cancer Discov. 9, 34–45 (2019). This study supports the importance of STING-mediated tumour immunogenicity to ICB efficacy by providing a molecular mechanism for its downregulation in lung cancer ICB resistance.
Morel, K. L. et al. EZH2 inhibition activates a dsRNA–STING–interferon stress axis that potentiates response to PD-1 checkpoint blockade in prostate cancer. Nat. Cancer 2, 444–456 (2021).
Bent, E. H. et al. Microenvironmental IL-6 inhibits anti-cancer immune responses generated by cytotoxic chemotherapy. Nat. Commun. 12, 6218 (2021).
Rodier, F. et al. Persistent DNA damage signalling triggers senescence-associated inflammatory cytokine secretion. Nat. Cell Biol. 11, 973–979 (2009).
Toledo, L. I., Murga, M., Gutierrez-Martinez, P., Soria, R. & Fernandez-Capetillo, O. ATR signaling can drive cells into senescence in the absence of DNA breaks. Genes Dev. 22, 297–302 (2008).
Kang, C. et al. The DNA damage response induces inflammation and senescence by inhibiting autophagy of GATA4. Science 349, aaa5612 (2015).
Wiley, C. D. et al. Small-molecule MDM2 antagonists attenuate the senescence-associated secretory phenotype. Sci. Rep. 8, 2410 (2018).
Laberge, R. M. et al. MTOR regulates the pro-tumorigenic senescence-associated secretory phenotype by promoting IL1A translation. Nat. Cell Biol. 17, 1049–1061 (2015).
Ge, M. et al. Senolytic targets and new strategies for clearing senescent cells. Mech. Ageing. Dev. 195, 111468 (2021).
Matsuoka, S. et al. ATM and ATR substrate analysis reveals extensive protein networks responsive to DNA damage. Science 316, 1160–1166 (2007).
Dunphy, G. et al. Non-canonical activation of the DNA sensing adaptor STING by ATM and IFI16 mediates NF-κB signaling after nuclear DNA damage. Mol. Cell 71, 745–760.e5 (2018).
Kondo, T. et al. DNA damage sensor MRE11 recognizes cytosolic double-stranded DNA and induces type I interferon by regulating STING trafficking. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 2969–2974 (2013).
Ho, S. S. et al. The DNA structure-specific endonuclease MUS81 mediates DNA sensor STING-dependent host rejection of prostate cancer cells. Immunity 44, 1177–1189 (2016).
Burleigh, K. et al. Human DNA-PK activates a STING-independent DNA sensing pathway. Sci. Immunol. 5, eaba4219 (2020).
Sun, X. et al. DNA-PK deficiency potentiates cGAS-mediated antiviral innate immunity. Nat. Commun. 11, 6182 (2020).
Guo, G. et al. Reciprocal regulation of RIG-I and XRCC4 connects DNA repair with RIG-I immune signaling. Nat. Commun. 12, 2187 (2021).
Vendetti, F. P. et al. ATR kinase inhibitor AZD6738 potentiates CD8+ T cell-dependent antitumor activity following radiation. J. Clin. Invest. 128, 3926–3940 (2018).
Sato, H. et al. DNA double-strand break repair pathway regulates PD-L1 expression in cancer cells. Nat. Commun. 8, 1751 (2017).
Chen, W. T. et al. ATM regulation of IL-8 links oxidative stress to cancer cell migration and invasion. eLife 4, e07270 (2015).
Nanda, R. et al. Pembrolizumab in patients with advanced triple-negative breast cancer: phase Ib KEYNOTE-012 study. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 2460–2467 (2016).
Disis, M. L. et al. Efficacy and safety of avelumab for patients with recurrent or refractory ovarian cancer: phase 1b results from the JAVELIN solid tumor trial. JAMA Oncol. 5, 393–401 (2019).
Nolan, E. et al. Combined immune checkpoint blockade as a therapeutic strategy for BRCA1-mutated breast cancer. Sci. Transl Med. 9, eaal4922 (2017).
Hugo, W. et al. Genomic and transcriptomic features of response to anti-PD-1 therapy in metastatic melanoma. Cell 165, 35–44 (2016).
Samstein, R. M. et al. Mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 differentially affect the tumor microenvironment and response to checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. Nat. Cancer 1, 1188–1203 (2021).
Spranger, S., Bao, R. & Gajewski, T. F. Melanoma-intrinsic β-catenin signalling prevents anti-tumour immunity. Nature 523, 231–235 (2015).
Jiang, H. et al. Chromatin-bound cGAS is an inhibitor of DNA repair and hence accelerates genome destabilization and cell death. EMBO J. 38, e102718 (2019).
Liu, H. et al. Nuclear cGAS suppresses DNA repair and promotes tumorigenesis. Nature 563, 131–136 (2018).
Chen, H. et al. cGAS suppresses genomic instability as a decelerator of replication forks. Sci. Adv. 6, eabb8941 (2020).
Hayman, T. J. et al. STING enhances cell death through regulation of reactive oxygen species and DNA damage. Nat. Commun. 12, 2327 (2021).
Kornepati, A. V. R. et al. Tumor-intrinsic PD-L1 promotes DNA repair in distinct cancers and suppresses PARP inhibitor-induced synthetic lethality. Cancer Res. 82, 2156–2170 (2022).
Tu, X. et al. PD-L1 (B7-H1) competes with the RNA exosome to regulate the DNA damage response and can be targeted to sensitize to radiation or chemotherapy. Mol. Cell 74, 1215–1226.e4 (2019).
Gao, Y. et al. Acetylation-dependent regulation of PD-L1 nuclear translocation dictates the efficacy of anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. Nat. Cell Biol. 22, 1064–1075 (2020).
Kornepati, A. V. R., Vadlamudi, R. K. & Curiel, T. J. Programmed death ligand 1 signals in cancer cells. Nat. Rev. Cancer 22, 174–189 (2022).
Sheehy, A. M., Gaddis, N. C., Choi, J. D. & Malim, M. H. Isolation of a human gene that inhibits HIV-1 infection and is suppressed by the viral Vif protein. Nature 418, 646–650 (2002).
Driscoll, C. B. et al. APOBEC3B-mediated corruption of the tumor cell immunopeptidome induces heteroclitic neoepitopes for cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Commun. 11, 790 (2020).
Wormann, S. M. et al. APOBEC3A drives deaminase domain-independent chromosomal instability to promote pancreatic cancer metastasis. Nat. Cancer 2, 1338–1356 (2021).
Coquel, F. et al. SAMHD1 acts at stalled replication forks to prevent interferon induction. Nature 557, 57–61 (2018).
Corrales, L. et al. Antagonism of the STING pathway via activation of the AIM2 inflammasome by intracellular DNA. J. Immunol. 196, 3191–3198 (2016).
Zhang, D. et al. Bladder cancer cell-intrinsic PD-L1 signals promote mTOR and autophagy activation that can be inhibited to improve cytotoxic chemotherapy. Cancer Med. 10, 2137–2152 (2021).
Morales, A. J. et al. A type I IFN-dependent DNA damage response regulates the genetic program and inflammasome activation in macrophages. eLife 6, e24655 (2017).
Kim, K. S., Kang, K. W., Seu, Y. B., Baek, S. H. & Kim, J. R. Interferon-γ induces cellular senescence through p53-dependent DNA damage signaling in human endothelial cells. Mech. Ageing Dev. 130, 179–188 (2009).
Sistigu, A. et al. Cancer cell-autonomous contribution of type I interferon signaling to the efficacy of chemotherapy. Nat. Med. 20, 1301–1309 (2014).
Cercek, A. et al. PD-1 blockade in mismatch repair-deficient, locally advanced rectal cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 386, 2363–2376 (2022).
Salas-Benito, D. et al. Paradigms on immunotherapy combinations with chemotherapy. Cancer Discov. 11, 1353–1367 (2021).
Bajorin, D. F. et al. Adjuvant nivolumab versus placebo in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 384, 2102–2114 (2021).
Kelly, R. J. et al. Adjuvant nivolumab in resected esophageal or gastroesophageal junction cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 384, 1191–1203 (2021).
Obeid, M. et al. Calreticulin exposure dictates the immunogenicity of cancer cell death. Nat. Med. 13, 54–61 (2007).
Aroldi, F. & Lord, S. R. Window of opportunity clinical trial designs to study cancer metabolism. Br. J. Cancer 122, 45–51 (2020).
Marron, T. U. et al. Neoadjuvant clinical trials provide a window of opportunity for cancer drug discovery. Nat. Med. 28, 626–629 (2022).
Wang, Y. et al. The reciprocity between radiotherapy and cancer immunotherapy. Clin. Cancer Res. 25, 1709–1717 (2019).
Deng, L. et al. Irradiation and anti-PD-L1 treatment synergistically promote antitumor immunity in mice. J. Clin. Invest. 124, 687–695 (2014).
Twyman-Saint Victor, C. et al. Radiation and dual checkpoint blockade activate non-redundant immune mechanisms in cancer. Nature 520, 373–377 (2015).
Lee, N. Y. et al. Avelumab plus standard-of-care chemoradiotherapy versus chemoradiotherapy alone in patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 22, 450–462 (2021).
Antonia, S. J. et al. Overall survival with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in stage III NSCLC. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 2342–2350 (2018).
Bernstein, M. B., Krishnan, S., Hodge, J. W. & Chang, J. Y. Immunotherapy and stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (ISABR): a curative approach? Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 13, 516–524 (2016).
Herrera, F. G. et al. Low-dose radiotherapy reverses tumor immune desertification and resistance to immunotherapy. Cancer Discov. 12, 108–133 (2022).
Aghevlian, S., Boyle, A. J. & Reilly, R. M. Radioimmunotherapy of cancer with high linear energy transfer (LET) radiation delivered by radionuclides emitting α-particles or Auger electrons. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 109, 102–118 (2017).
Lord, C. J. & Ashworth, A. PARP inhibitors: synthetic lethality in the clinic. Science 355, 1152–1158 (2017).
Ding, L. et al. PARP inhibition elicits STING-dependent antitumor immunity in Brca1-deficient ovarian cancer. Cell Rep. 25, 2972–2980.e5 (2018). To our knowledge, this is the first report that PARP inhibitor efficacy against BRCA-deficient tumours depends on cancer cell-intrinsic, DNA damage-induced cGAS–STING activation and host anti-tumour immunity.
Pantelidou, C. et al. PARP inhibitor efficacy depends on CD8+ T-cell recruitment via intratumoral STING pathway activation in BRCA-deficient models of triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Discov. 9, 722–737 (2019).
Chabanon, R. M. et al. PARP inhibition enhances tumor cell-intrinsic immunity in ERCC1-deficient non-small cell lung cancer. J. Clin. Invest. 129, 1211–1228 (2019).
Farkkila, A. et al. Immunogenomic profiling determines responses to combined PARP and PD-1 inhibition in ovarian cancer. Nat. Commun. 11, 1459 (2020).
Konstantinopoulos, P. A. et al. Single-arm phases 1 and 2 trial of niraparib in combination with pembrolizumab in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian carcinoma. JAMA Oncol. 5, 1141–1149 (2019).
Lampert, E. J. et al. Combination of PARP inhibitor olaparib, and PD-L1 inhibitor durvalumab, in recurrent ovarian cancer: a proof-of-concept phase II study. Clin. Cancer Res. 26, 4268–4279 (2020).
Pilie, P. G., Tang, C., Mills, G. B. & Yap, T. A. State-of-the-art strategies for targeting the DNA damage response in cancer. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 16, 81–104 (2019).
Konstantinopoulos, P. A., Ceccaldi, R., Shapiro, G. I. & D’Andrea, A. D. Homologous recombination deficiency: exploiting the fundamental vulnerability of ovarian cancer. Cancer Discov. 5, 1137–1154 (2015).
Wang, L. et al. Inhibition of the ATM/Chk2 axis promotes cGAS/STING signaling in ARID1A-deficient tumors. J. Clin. Invest. 130, 5951–5966 (2020).
McNally, J. P. et al. Manipulating DNA damage-response signaling for the treatment of immune-mediated diseases. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E4782–E4791 (2017).
Do, K. T. et al. Immune modulating activity of the CHK1 inhibitor prexasertib and anti-PD-L1 antibody LY3300054 in patients with high-grade serous ovarian cancer and other solid tumors. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 70, 2991–3000 (2021).
Fang, P. Q. et al. Radiation and CAR T-cell therapy in lymphoma: future frontiers and potential opportunities for synergy. Front. Oncol. 11, 648655 (2021).
Huang, J. et al. The PARP1 inhibitor BMN 673 exhibits immunoregulatory effects in a Brca1−/− murine model of ovarian cancer. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 463, 551–556 (2015).
Ruzicka, M. et al. RIG-I-based immunotherapy enhances survival in preclinical AML models and sensitizes AML cells to checkpoint blockade. Leukemia 34, 1017–1026 (2020).
Pan, B. S. et al. An orally available non-nucleotide STING agonist with antitumor activity. Science 369, aba6098 (2020).
Shih, A. Y., Damm-Ganamet, K. L. & Mirzadegan, T. Dynamic structural differences between human and mouse STING lead to differing sensitivity to DMXAA. Biophys. J. 114, 32–39 (2018).
Kennedy, E. M. et al. Development of intravenously administered synthetic RNA virus immunotherapy for the treatment of cancer. Nat. Commun. 13, 5907 (2022).
Schmid, P. et al. Atezolizumab and nab-paclitaxel in advanced triple-negative breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 2108–2121 (2018).
Emens, L. A. et al. First-line atezolizumab plus nab-paclitaxel for unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: IMpassion130 final overall survival analysis. Ann. Oncol. 32, 983–993 (2021).
Cortes, J. et al. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in advanced triple-negative breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 387, 217–226 (2022).
Doki, Y. et al. Nivolumab combination therapy in advanced esophageal squamous-cell carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 386, 449–462 (2022).
Janjigian, Y. Y. et al. First-line nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for advanced gastric, gastro-oesophageal junction, and oesophageal adenocarcinoma (CheckMate 649): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet 398, 27–40 (2021).
Paz-Ares, L. et al. Durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide versus platinum-etoposide in first-line treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CASPIAN): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet 394, 1929–1939 (2019).
Horn, L. et al. First-line atezolizumab plus chemotherapy in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 379, 2220–2229 (2018).
Gandhi, L. et al. Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 378, 2078–2092 (2018).
Socinski, M. A. et al. Atezolizumab for first-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC. N. Engl. J. Med. 378, 2288–2301 (2018).
Paz-Ares, L. et al. First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab combined with two cycles of chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 9LA): an international, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 22, 198–211 (2021).
Matsuoka, S., Huang, M. & Elledge, S. J. Linkage of ATM to cell cycle regulation by the Chk2 protein kinase. Science 282, 1893–1897 (1998).
Liu, C., Vyas, A., Kassab, M. A., Singh, A. K. & Yu, X. The role of poly ADP-ribosylation in the first wave of DNA damage response. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, 8129–8141 (2017).
Densham, R. M. et al. Human BRCA1–BARD1 ubiquitin ligase activity counteracts chromatin barriers to DNA resection. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 23, 647–655 (2016).
Ira, G. et al. DNA end resection, homologous recombination and DNA damage checkpoint activation require CDK1. Nature 431, 1011–1017 (2004).
Zhao, W. et al. Promotion of BRCA2-dependent homologous recombination by DSS1 via RPA targeting and DNA mimicry. Mol. Cell 59, 176–187 (2015).
Jensen, R. B., Carreira, A. & Kowalczykowski, S. C. Purified human BRCA2 stimulates RAD51-mediated recombination. Nature 467, 678–683 (2010).
Ghezraoui, H. et al. 53BP1 cooperation with the REV7-shieldin complex underpins DNA structure-specific NHEJ. Nature 560, 122–127 (2018).
Vanpouille-Box, C. et al. DNA exonuclease Trex1 regulates radiotherapy-induced tumour immunogenicity. Nat. Commun. 8, 15618 (2017).
Luke, J. J. et al. Improved survival associated with local tumor response following multisite radiotherapy and pembrolizumab: secondary analysis of a phase I trial. Clin. Cancer Res. 26, 6437–6444 (2020).
Chen, Y. et al. p38 inhibition provides anti-DNA virus immunity by regulation of USP21 phosphorylation and STING activation. J. Exp. Med. 214, 991–1010 (2017).
Hu, M. M. et al. Sumoylation promotes the stability of the DNA sensor cGAS and the adaptor STING to regulate the kinetics of response to DNA virus. Immunity 45, 555–569 (2016).
Cui, Y. et al. SENP7 potentiates cGAS activation by relieving SUMO-mediated inhibition of cytosolic DNA sensing. PLoS Pathog. 13, e1006156 (2017).
Tao, L. et al. Reactive oxygen species oxidize STING and suppress interferon production. eLife 9, e57837 (2020).
Levine, A. J. p53: 800 million years of evolution and 40 years of discovery. Nat. Rev. Cancer 20, 471–480 (2020).
Ghosh, M. et al. Mutant p53 suppresses innate immune signaling to promote tumorigenesis. Cancer Cell 39, 494–508.e5 (2021).
Li, Z. et al. PPM1A regulates antiviral signaling by antagonizing TBK1-mediated STING phosphorylation and aggregation. PLoS Pathog. 11, e1004783 (2015).
Lv, S. et al. Regulation and targeting of androgen receptor nuclear localization in castration-resistant prostate cancer. J. Clin. Invest. 131, e141335 (2021).
Khan, S. et al. PROteolysis TArgeting Chimeras (PROTACs) as emerging anticancer therapeutics. Oncogene 39, 4909–4924 (2020).
Yamazaki, T. et al. Mitochondrial DNA drives abscopal responses to radiation that are inhibited by autophagy. Nat. Immunol. 21, 1160–1171 (2020).
Han, C. et al. Tumor cells suppress radiation-induced immunity by hijacking caspase 9 signaling. Nat. Immunol. 21, 546–554 (2020).
Woo, S. R. et al. STING-dependent cytosolic DNA sensing mediates innate immune recognition of immunogenic tumors. Immunity 41, 830–842 (2014). To our knowledge, this is the first report of the contribution of host STING activation by tumour-derived DNA to CD8+ T cell-mediated tumour elimination in contrast to tumour STING effects.
Corrales, L. et al. Direct activation of STING in the tumor microenvironment leads to potent and systemic tumor regression and immunity. Cell Rep. 11, 1018–1030 (2015).
Deng, L. et al. STING-dependent cytosolic DNA sensing promotes radiation-induced type i interferon-dependent antitumor immunity in immunogenic tumors. Immunity 41, 843–852 (2014). To our knowledge, this is the first report that radiation efficacy can depend in part on anti-tumour immunity through cGAS–STING activation in tumours in vivo.
Qiao, Y. et al. Human cancer cells sense cytosolic nucleic acids through the RIG-I–MAVS Pathway and cGAS–STING Pathway. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 8, 606001 (2020).
Chiu, Y. H., Macmillan, J. B. & Chen, Z. J. RNA polymerase III detects cytosolic DNA and induces type I interferons through the RIG-I pathway. Cell 138, 576–591 (2009).
Canadas, I. et al. Tumor innate immunity primed by specific interferon-stimulated endogenous retroviruses. Nat. Med. 24, 1143–1150 (2018).
Chiappinelli, K. B. et al. Inhibiting DNA methylation causes an interferon response in cancer via dsRNA including endogenous retroviruses. Cell 162, 974–986 (2015).
Wang, L. et al. Decitabine enhances lymphocyte migration and function and synergizes with CTLA-4 blockade in a murine ovarian cancer model. Cancer Immunol. Res. 3, 1030–1041 (2015).
Kariko, K., Buckstein, M., Ni, H. & Weissman, D. Suppression of RNA recognition by Toll-like receptors: the impact of nucleoside modification and the evolutionary origin of RNA. Immunity 23, 165–175 (2005).
Thiel, V. Viral RNA in an m6A disguise. Nat. Microbiol. 5, 531–532 (2020).
Zust, R. et al. Ribose 2′-O-methylation provides a molecular signature for the distinction of self and non-self mRNA dependent on the RNA sensor Mda5. Nat. Immunol. 12, 137–143 (2011).
Li, G. et al. LIMIT is an immunogenic lncRNA in cancer immunity and immunotherapy. Nat. Cell Biol. 23, 526–537 (2021).
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the following funding sources: P.S. (R35 CA24180), T.J.C. (R01 CA268641, CA05415), A.V.R.K. (F30 CA239390) and C.M.R. (American Cancer Society PF-22-034-01-DMC).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
A.V.R.K. and T.J.C. conceived the idea and wrote and edited the manuscript. C.M.R. and P.S. assisted with writing specific sections and editing the article.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Peer review
Peer review information
Nature thanks the anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Additional information
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Kornepati, A.V.R., Rogers, C.M., Sung, P. et al. The complementarity of DDR, nucleic acids and anti-tumour immunity. Nature 619, 475–486 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06069-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06069-6
This article is cited by
-
Silencing PinX1 enhances radiosensitivity and antitumor-immunity of radiotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer
Journal of Translational Medicine (2024)
-
Tumor ablation induced anti-tumor immunity: destruction of the tumor in situ with the aim to evoke a robust anti-tumor immune response
Cancer and Metastasis Reviews (2023)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
