Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Review Article
  • Published:

The cGAS–STING pathway and cancer

Nature Cancer volume 3, pages 1452–1463 (2022)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The cyclic GMP–AMP synthase (cGAS)–stimulator of interferon genes (STING) pathway has emerged as a critical innate immune pathway that, following engagement by DNA, promotes distinct immune effector responses that can impact virtually all aspects of tumorigenesis, from malignant cell transformation to metastasis. Here we address how natural tumor-associated processes and traditional cancer therapies are shaped by cGAS–STING signaling, and how this contributes to beneficial or detrimental outcomes of cancer. We consider current efforts to target the cGAS–STING axis in tumors and highlight new frontiers in cGAS–STING biology to inspire thinking about their connection to cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: The cGAS–STING pathway in tumor cells.
Fig. 2: Origins and effects of cGAS–STING activation in the TME.
Fig. 3: Activation of (cGAS)–STING in anticancer therapies.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Waldman, A. D., Fritz, J. M. & Lenardo, M. J. A guide to cancer immunotherapy: from T cell basic science to clinical practice. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 20, 651–668 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Lin, M. J. et al. Cancer vaccines: the next immunotherapy frontier. Nat. Cancer 3, 911–926 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Iwasaki, A. & Medzhitov, R. Control of adaptive immunity by the innate immune system. Nat. Immunol. 16, 343–353 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Demaria, O. et al. Harnessing innate immunity in cancer therapy. Nature 574, 45–56 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Sun, L., Wu, J., Du, F., Chen, X. & Chen, Z. J. Cyclic GMP–AMP synthase is a cytosolic DNA sensor that activates the type I interferon pathway. Science 339, 786–791 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Ablasser, A. et al. cGAS produces a 2′–5′-linked cyclic dinucleotide second messenger that activates STING. Nature 498, 380–384 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Diner, E. J. et al. The innate immune DNA sensor cGAS produces a noncanonical cyclic dinucleotide that activates human STING. Cell Rep. 3, 1355–1361 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Wu, J. et al. Cyclic GMP–AMP is an endogenous second messenger in innate immune signaling by cytosolic DNA. Science 339, 826–830 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gao, P. et al. Cyclic [G(2′,5′)pA(3′,5′)p] is the metazoan second messenger produced by DNA-activated cyclic GMP–AMP synthase. Cell 153, 1094–1107 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Ishikawa, H., Ma, Z. & Barber, G. N. STING regulates intracellular DNA-mediated, type I interferon-dependent innate immunity. Nature 461, 788–792 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. 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).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Wang, H. et al. cGAS is essential for the antitumor effect of immune checkpoint blockade. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 1637–1642 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sharma, S. et al. Suppression of systemic autoimmunity by the innate immune adaptor STING. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E710–E717 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Lemos, H. et al. Activation of the STING adaptor attenuates experimental autoimmune encephalitis. J. Immunol. 192, 5571–5578 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gui, X. et al. Autophagy induction via STING trafficking is a primordial function of the cGAS pathway. Nature 567, 262–266 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Gulen, M. F. et al. Signalling strength determines proapoptotic functions of STING. Nat. Commun. 8, 427 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Larkin, B. et al. Cutting edge: activation of STING in T cells induces type I IFN responses and cell death. J. Immunol. 199, 397–402 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ablasser, A. et al. Cell intrinsic immunity spreads to bystander cells via the intercellular transfer of cGAMP. Nature 503, 530–534 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Carozza, J. A. et al. Extracellular cGAMP is a cancer-cell-produced immunotransmitter involved in radiation-induced anticancer immunity. Nat. Cancer 1, 184–196 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Luteijn, R. D. et al. SLC19A1 transports immunoreactive cyclic dinucleotides. Nature 573, 434–438 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Ritchie, C., Cordova, A. F., Hess, G. T., Bassik, M. C. & Li, L. SLC19A1 is an importer of the immunotransmitter cGAMP. Mol. Cell 75, 372–381 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Bridgeman, A. et al. Viruses transfer the antiviral second messenger cGAMP between cells. Science 349, 1228–1232 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Gentili, M. et al. Transmission of innate immune signaling by packaging of cGAMP in viral particles. Science 349, 1232–1236 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Ablasser, A. & Hur, S. Regulation of cGAS- and RLR-mediated immunity to nucleic acids. Nat. Immunol. 21, 17–29 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Hopfner, K. P. & Hornung, V. Molecular mechanisms and cellular functions of cGAS–STING signalling. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 21, 501–521 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Guey, B. & Ablasser, A. Emerging dimensions of cellular cGAS–STING signaling. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 74, 164–171 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Gray, E. E., Treuting, P. M., Woodward, J. J. & Stetson, D. B. Cutting edge: cGAS is required for lethal autoimmune disease in the Trex1-deficient mouse model of Aicardi–Goutieres syndrome. J. Immunol. 195, 1939–1943 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Ablasser, A. et al. TREX1 deficiency triggers cell-autonomous immunity in a cGAS-dependent manner. J. Immunol. 192, 5993–5997 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Gao, D. et al. Activation of cyclic GMP–AMP synthase by self-DNA causes autoimmune diseases. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E5699–E5705 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Greiner-Tollersrud, O. K. et al. ADA2 is a lysosomal DNase regulating the type-I interferon response. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.06.21.162990 (2020).

  31. Pathare, G. R. et al. Structural mechanism of cGAS inhibition by the nucleosome. Nature 587, 668–672 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Zierhut, C. et al. The cytoplasmic DNA sensor cGAS promotes mitotic cell death. Cell 178, 302–315 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Kujirai, T. et al. Structural basis for the inhibition of cGAS by nucleosomes. Science 370, 455–458 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Zhao, B. et al. The molecular basis of tight nuclear tethering and inactivation of cGAS. Nature 587, 673–677 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Michalski, S. et al. Structural basis for sequestration and autoinhibition of cGAS by chromatin. Nature 587, 678–682 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. Guey, B. et al. BAF restricts cGAS on nuclear DNA to prevent innate immune activation. Science 369, 823–828 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. West, A. P. et al. Mitochondrial DNA stress primes the antiviral innate immune response. Nature 520, 553–557 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Maltbaek, J. H., Cambier, S., Snyder, J. M. & Stetson, D. B. ABCC1 transporter exports the immunostimulatory cyclic dinucleotide cGAMP. Immunity 55, 1799–1812 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Li, L. et al. Hydrolysis of 2′3′-cGAMP by ENPP1 and design of nonhydrolyzable analogs. Nat. Chem. Biol. 10, 1043–1048 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Gonugunta, V. K. et al. Trafficking-mediated STING degradation requires sorting to acidified endolysosomes and can be targeted to enhance anti-tumor response. Cell Rep. 21, 3234–3242 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Mukai, K. et al. Activation of STING requires palmitoylation at the Golgi. Nat. Commun. 7, 11932 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Chabanon, R. M. et al. Targeting the DNA damage response in immuno-oncology: developments and opportunities. Nat. Rev. Cancer 21, 701–717 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. 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).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. 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).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Guan, J. et al. MLH1 deficiency-triggered DNA hyperexcision by exonuclease 1 activates the cGAS–STING pathway. Cancer Cell 39, 109–121 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. 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).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Coquel, F. et al. SAMHD1 acts at stalled replication forks to prevent interferon induction. Nature 557, 57–61 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. 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).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. 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).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Turner, K. M. et al. Extrachromosomal oncogene amplification drives tumour evolution and genetic heterogeneity. Nature 543, 122–125 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Wang, Y. et al. eccDNAs are apoptotic products with high innate immunostimulatory activity. Nature 599, 308–314 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  52. Volkman, H. E., Cambier, S., Gray, E. E. & Stetson, D. B. Tight nuclear tethering of cGAS is essential for preventing autoreactivity. eLife 8, e47491 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Wischnewski, M. & Ablasser, A. Interplay of cGAS with chromatin. Trends Biochem. Sci. 46, 822–831 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Orzalli, M. H. et al. cGAS-mediated stabilization of IFI16 promotes innate signaling during herpes simplex virus infection. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, E1773–E1781 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. 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).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Crasta, K. et al. DNA breaks and chromosome pulverization from errors in mitosis. Nature 482, 53–58 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Flynn, P. J., Koch, P. D. & Mitchison, T. J. Chromatin bridges, not micronuclei, activate cGAS after drug-induced mitotic errors in human cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2103585118 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Gluck, S. et al. Innate immune sensing of cytosolic chromatin fragments through cGAS promotes senescence. Nat. Cell Biol. 19, 1061–1070 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Dou, Z. et al. Cytoplasmic chromatin triggers inflammation in senescence and cancer. Nature 550, 402–406 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Yang, H., Wang, H., Ren, J., Chen, Q. & Chen, Z. J. cGAS is essential for cellular senescence. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E4612–E4620 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Ivanov, A. et al. Lysosome-mediated processing of chromatin in senescence. J. Cell Biol. 202, 129–143 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Hatch, E. M. & Hetzer, M. W. Nuclear envelope rupture is induced by actin-based nucleus confinement. J. Cell Biol. 215, 27–36 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Mackenzie, K. J. et al. cGAS surveillance of micronuclei links genome instability to innate immunity. Nature 548, 461–465 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Harding, S. M. et al. Mitotic progression following DNA damage enables pattern recognition within micronuclei. Nature 548, 466–470 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Bakhoum, S. F. et al. Chromosomal instability drives metastasis through a cytosolic DNA response. Nature 553, 467–472 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Maciejowski, J., Li, Y., Bosco, N., Campbell, P. J. & de Lange, T. Chromothripsis and kataegis induced by telomere crisis. Cell 163, 1641–1654 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  67. Tang, S., Stokasimov, E., Cui, Y. & Pellman, D. Breakage of cytoplasmic chromosomes by pathological DNA base excision repair. Nature 606, 930–936 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Gratia, M. et al. Bloom syndrome protein restrains innate immune sensing of micronuclei by cGAS. J. Exp. Med. 216, 1199–1213 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Mackenzie, K. J. et al. Ribonuclease H2 mutations induce a cGAS/STING-dependent innate immune response. EMBO J. 35, 831–844 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  70. Ding, L. et al. PARP inhibition elicits STING-dependent antitumor immunity in Brca1-deficient ovarian cancer. Cell Rep. 25, 2972–2980 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  71. Shen, J. et al. PARPi triggers the STING-dependent immune response and enhances the therapeutic efficacy of immune checkpoint blockade independent of BRCAness. Cancer Res. 79, 311–319 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. 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).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Mohr, L. et al. ER-directed TREX1 limits cGAS activation at micronuclei. Mol. Cell 81, 724–738 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Willan, J. et al. ESCRT-III is necessary for the integrity of the nuclear envelope in micronuclei but is aberrant at ruptured micronuclear envelopes generating damage. Oncogenesis 8, 29 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  75. MacDonald, K. M., Nicholson-Puthenveedu, S., Tageldein, M. M., Arrowsmith, C. & Harding, S. M. cGAS recruitment to micronuclei is dictated by pre-existing nuclear chromatin status. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.01.13.476191 (2022).

  76. Ishak, C. A. & Carvalho, D. D. D. Reactivation of endogenous retroelements in cancer development and therapy. Ann. Rev. Cancer Biol. 4, 159–176 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Cañadas, I. et al. Tumor innate immunity primed by specific interferon-stimulated endogenous retroviruses. Nat. Med. 24, 1143–1150 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Chiappinelli, K. B. et al. Inhibiting DNA methylation causes an interferon response in cancer via dsRNA including endogenous retroviruses. Cell 162, 974–986 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Roulois, D. et al. DNA-demethylating agents target colorectal cancer cells by inducing viral mimicry by endogenous transcripts. Cell 162, 961–973 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. 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).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. De Cecco, M. et al. L1 drives IFN in senescent cells and promotes age-associated inflammation. Nature 566, 73–78 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  82. Takahashi, A. et al. Downregulation of cytoplasmic DNases is implicated in cytoplasmic DNA accumulation and SASP in senescent cells. Nat. Commun. 9, 1249 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Wan, L. et al. Translation stress and collided ribosomes are co-activators of cGAS. Mol. Cell 81, 2808–2822 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Klarquist, J. et al. STING-mediated DNA sensing promotes antitumor and autoimmune responses to dying cells. J. Immunol. 193, 6124–6134 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Woo, S. R. et al. STING-dependent cytosolic DNA sensing mediates innate immune recognition of immunogenic tumors. Immunity 41, 830–842 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  86. 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).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Boada-Romero, E., Martinez, J., Heckmann, B. L. & Green, D. R. The clearance of dead cells by efferocytosis. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 21, 398–414 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Xu, M. M. et al. Dendritic cells but not macrophages sense tumor mitochondrial DNA for cross-priming through signal regulatory protein α signaling. Immunity 47, 363–373 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Mender, I. et al. Telomere stress potentiates STING-dependent anti-tumor immunity. Cancer Cell 38, 400–411 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Zhou, Y. et al. Blockade of the phagocytic receptor MerTK on tumor-associated macrophages enhances P2X7R-dependent STING activation by tumor-derived cGAMP. Immunity 52, 357–373 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Doran, A. C., Yurdagul, A. & Tabas, I. Efferocytosis in health and disease. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 20, 254–267 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. Galluzzi, L., Buqué, A., Kepp, O., Zitvogel, L. & Kroemer, G. Immunogenic cell death in cancer and infectious disease. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 17, 97–111 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  93. Roberts, A. W. et al. Tissue-resident macrophages are locally programmed for silent clearance of apoptotic cells. Immunity 47, 913–927 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  94. Chen, Q. et al. Carcinoma–astrocyte gap junctions promote brain metastasis by cGAMP transfer. Nature 533, 493–498 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  95. Schadt, L. et al. Cancer-cell-intrinsic cGAS expression mediates tumor immunogenicity. Cell Rep. 29, 1236–1248 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Li, J. et al. Metastasis and immune evasion from extracellular cGAMP hydrolysis. Cancer Discov. 11, 1212–1227 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Cordova, A. F., Ritchie, C., Böhnert, V. & Li, L. Human SLC46A2 is the dominant cGAMP importer in extracellular cGAMP-sensing macrophages and monocytes. ACS Cent. Sci. 7, 1073–1088 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Lahey, L. J. et al. LRRC8A:C/E heteromeric channels are ubiquitous transporters of cGAMP. Mol. Cell. 80, 578–591 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  99. Zhou, C. et al. Transfer of cGAMP into bystander cells via LRRC8 volume-regulated anion channels augments STING-mediated interferon responses and anti-viral immunity. Immunity 52, 767–781 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Maltbaek, J. H. et al. ABCC1 transporter exports the immunostimulatory cyclic dinucleotide cGAMP. Immunity 55, 1799–1812 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Marcus, A. et al. Tumor-derived cGAMP triggers a STING-mediated interferon response in non-tumor cells to activate the NK cell response. Immunity 49, 754–763 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Fuertes, M. B. et al. Host type I IFN signals are required for antitumor CD8+ T cell responses through CD8α+ dendritic cells. J. Exp. Med. 208, 2005–2016 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Diamond, M. S. et al. Type I interferon is selectively required by dendritic cells for immune rejection of tumors. J. Exp. Med. 208, 1989–2003 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  104. Andzinski, L. et al. Growing tumors induce a local STING dependent type I IFN response in dendritic cells. Int. J. Cancer 139, 1350–1357 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  105. Ohkuri, T. et al. STING contributes to antiglioma immunity via triggering type I IFN signals in the tumor microenvironment. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2, 1199–1208 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Yum, S., Li, M., Fang, Y. & Chen, Z. J. TBK1 recruitment to STING activates both IRF3 and NF-κB that mediate immune defense against tumors and viral infections. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2100225118 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  107. Francica, B. J. et al. TNFα and radioresistant stromal cells are essential for therapeutic efficacy of cyclic dinucleotide STING agonists in nonimmunogenic tumors. Cancer Immunol. Res. 6, 422–433 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  108. Kang, T. W. et al. Senescence surveillance of pre-malignant hepatocytes limits liver cancer development. Nature 479, 547–551 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  109. Nassour, J. et al. Autophagic cell death restricts chromosomal instability during replicative crisis. Nature 565, 659–663 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  110. Lam, A. R. et al. RAE1 ligands for the NKG2D receptor are regulated by STING-dependent DNA sensor pathways in lymphoma. Cancer Res. 74, 2193–2203 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. Ranoa, D. R. E. et al. STING promotes homeostasis via regulation of cell proliferation and chromosomal stability. Cancer Res. 79, 1465–1479 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. 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).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  113. Ahn, J. et al. Inflammation-driven carcinogenesis is mediated through STING. Nat. Commun. 5, 5166 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Hanahan, D. & Weinberg, R. A. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell 144, 646–674 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  115. Hou, Y. et al. Non-canonical NF-κB antagonizes STING sensor-mediated DNA sensing in radiotherapy. Immunity 49, 490–503 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  116. Liang, H. et al. Host STING-dependent MDSC mobilization drives extrinsic radiation resistance. Nat. Commun. 8, 1736 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  117. Weichselbaum, R. R. et al. An interferon-related gene signature for DNA damage resistance is a predictive marker for chemotherapy and radiation for breast cancer. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 18490–18495 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  118. Wu, J., Dobbs, N., Yang, K. & Yan, N. Interferon-independent activities of mammalian STING mediate antiviral response and tumor immune evasion. Immunity 53, 115–126 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  119. Concepcion, A. R. et al. The volume-regulated anion channel LRRC8C suppresses T cell function by regulating cyclic dinucleotide transport and STING–p53 signaling. Nat. Immunol. 23, 287–302 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  120. Ching, L. M. et al. Induction of endothelial cell apoptosis by the antivascular agent 5,6-dimethylxanthenone-4-acetic acid. Br. J. Cancer 86, 1937–1942 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  121. Di Domizio, J. et al. The cGAS–STING pathway drives type I IFN immunopathology in COVID-19. Nature 603, 145–151 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  122. Huang, L. et al. Cutting edge: DNA sensing via the STING adaptor in myeloid dendritic cells induces potent tolerogenic responses. J. Immunol. 191, 3509–3513 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  123. Jneid, B. et al. Cellular selectivity of STING stimulation determines priming of anti-tumor T cell responses. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.12.01.469893 (2021).

  124. Haag, S. M. et al. Targeting STING with covalent small-molecule inhibitors. Nature 559, 269–273 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  125. Vincent, J. et al. Small molecule inhibition of cGAS reduces interferon expression in primary macrophages from autoimmune mice. Nat. Commun. 8, 750 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  126. Wörmann, S. M. et al. APOBEC3A drives deaminase domain-independent chromosomal instability to promote pancreatic cancer metastasis. Nat. Cancer 2, 1338–1356 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  127. Liu, H. et al. Nuclear cGAS suppresses DNA repair and promotes tumorigenesis. Nature 563, 131–136 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  128. Hu, S. et al. cGAS restricts colon cancer development by protecting intestinal barrier integrity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118, e2105747118 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  129. Demaria, O. et al. STING activation of tumor endothelial cells initiates spontaneous and therapeutic antitumor immunity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 112, 15408–15413 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  130. Sivick, K. E. et al. Magnitude of therapeutic STING activation determines CD8+ T cell-mediated anti-tumor immunity. Cell Rep. 25, 3074–3085 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  131. Baird, J. R. et al. Radiotherapy combined with novel STING-targeting oligonucleotides results in regression of established tumors. Cancer Res. 76, 50–61 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  132. Chandra, D. et al. STING ligand c-di-GMP improves cancer vaccination against metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2, 901–910 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  133. Yum, S., Li, M., Frankel, A. E. & Chen, Z. J. Roles of the cGAS–STING pathway in cancer immunosurveillance and immunotherapy. Annu. Rev. Cancer Biol. 3, 323–344 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  134. Petrasek, J. et al. STING–IRF3 pathway links endoplasmic reticulum stress with hepatocyte apoptosis in early alcoholic liver disease. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 16544–16549 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  135. Curran, E. et al. STING pathway activation stimulates potent immunity against acute myeloid leukemia. Cell Rep. 15, 2357–2366 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  136. Le Naour, J., Zitvogel, L., Galluzzi, L., Vacchelli, E. & Kroemer, G. Trial watch: STING agonists in cancer therapy. Oncoimmunology 9, 1777624 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  137. Harrington, K. et al. LBA15 preliminary results of the first-in-human (FIH) study of MK-1454, an agonist of stimulator of interferon genes (STING), as monotherapy or in combination with pembrolizumab (pembro) in patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphomas. Ann. Oncol. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdy424.015 (2018).

  138. Meric-Bernstam, F. et al. Phase Ib study of MIW815 (ADU-S100) in combination with spartalizumab (PDR001) in patients (pts) with advanced/metastatic solid tumors or lymphomas. J. Clin. Oncol. 37, 2507 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  139. Flood, B. A., Higgs, E. F., Li, S., Luke, J. J. & Gajewski, T. F. STING pathway agonism as a cancer therapeutic. Immunol. Rev. 290, 24–38 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  140. Conde, E. et al. Epitope spreading driven by the joint action of CART cells and pharmacological STING stimulation counteracts tumor escape via antigen-loss variants. J. Immunother. Cancer 9, e003351 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  141. Xu, N. et al. STING agonist promotes CAR T cell trafficking and persistence in breast cancer. J. Exp. Med. 218, e20200844 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  142. Song, S. et al. Decreased expression of STING predicts poor prognosis in patients with gastric cancer. Sci. Rep. 7, 39858 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  143. 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).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  144. Lemos, H. et al. STING promotes the growth of tumors characterized by low antigenicity via IDO activation. Cancer Res. 76, 2076–2081 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  145. Lemos, H. et al. Overcoming resistance to STING agonist therapy to incite durable protective antitumor immunity. J. Immunother. Cancer 8, e001182 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  146. Cerboni, S. et al. Intrinsic antiproliferative activity of the innate sensor STING in T lymphocytes. J. Exp. Med. 214, 1769–1785 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  147. Jang, S. C. et al. ExoSTING, an extracellular vesicle loaded with STING agonists, promotes tumor immune surveillance. Commun. Biol. 4, 497 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  148. Lu, X. et al. Engineered PLGA microparticles for long-term, pulsatile release of STING agonist for cancer immunotherapy. Sci. Transl. Med. 12, eaaz6606 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  149. Wilson, D. R. et al. Biodegradable STING agonist nanoparticles for enhanced cancer immunotherapy. Nanomedicine 14, 237–246 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  150. Shae, D. et al. Endosomolytic polymersomes increase the activity of cyclic dinucleotide STING agonists to enhance cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Nanotechnol. 14, 269–278 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  151. Dane, E. L. et al. STING agonist delivery by tumour-penetrating PEG-lipid nanodiscs primes robust anticancer immunity. Nat. Mater. 21, 710–720 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  152. 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).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  153. Li, T. et al. Antitumor activity of cGAMP via stimulation of cGAS–cGAMP–STING–IRF3 mediated innate immune response. Sci. Rep. 6, 19049 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  154. Kim, D. S. et al. E7766, a macrocycle-bridged stimulator of interferon genes (STING) agonist with potent pan-genotypic activity. ChemMedChem 16, 1740–1743 (2021).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  155. Ramanjulu, J. M. et al. Design of amidobenzimidazole STING receptor agonists with systemic activity. Nature 564, 439–443 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  156. Pan, B. S. et al. An orally available non-nucleotide STING agonist with antitumor activity. Science 369, eaba6098 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  157. Chin, E. N. et al. Antitumor activity of a systemic STING-activating non-nucleotide cGAMP mimetic. Science 369, 993–999 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  158. Miao, L. et al. Delivery of mRNA vaccines with heterocyclic lipids increases anti-tumor efficacy by STING-mediated immune cell activation. Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 1174–1185 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  159. Tse, S. W. et al. mRNA-encoded, constitutively active STINGV155M is a potent genetic adjuvant of antigen-specific CD8+ T cell response. Mol. Ther. 29, 2227–2238 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  160. Liu, Y. et al. Activated STING in a vascular and pulmonary syndrome. N. Engl. J. Med. 371, 507–518 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  161. Wu, J. et al. STING-mediated disruption of calcium homeostasis chronically activates ER stress and primes T cell death. J. Exp. Med. 216, 867–883 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  162. Warner, J. D. et al. STING-associated vasculopathy develops independently of IRF3 in mice. J. Exp. Med. 214, 3279–3292 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  163. Motwani, M. et al. Hierarchy of clinical manifestations in SAVI N153S and V154M mouse models. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 116, 7941–7950 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  164. Vanpouille-Box, C. et al. DNA exonuclease Trex1 regulates radiotherapy-induced tumour immunogenicity. Nat. Commun. 8, 15618 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  165. Kitajima, S. et al. Suppression of STING associated with LKB1 loss in KRAS-driven lung cancer. Cancer Discov. 9, 34–45 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  166. Liu, W. et al. Lipid nanoparticles delivering constitutively active STING mRNA as a novel anti-cancer therapeutic approach. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.01.08.475499 (2022).

  167. 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).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  168. Carozza, J. A. et al. Structure-aided development of small-molecule inhibitors of ENPP1, the extracellular phosphodiesterase of the immunotransmitter cGAMP. Cell Chem. Biol. 27, 1347–1358 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  169. Liu, X. et al. CD47 blockade triggers T cell-mediated destruction of immunogenic tumors. Nat. Med. 21, 1209–1215 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  170. de Mingo Pulido, Á. et al. The inhibitory receptor TIM-3 limits activation of the cGAS–STING pathway in intra-tumoral dendritic cells by suppressing extracellular DNA uptake. Immunity 54, 1154–1167 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  171. Cunha, L. D. et al. LC3-associated phagocytosis in myeloid cells promotes tumor immune tolerance. Cell 175, 429–441 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation program grant agreement (grant no. 804933, ImAgine) and the Dr. Josef Steiner Cancer Award. A. Scott provided valuable input and helped edit the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Global Health Institute, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland

    Natasha Samson & Andrea Ablasser

  2. Swiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research (ISREC), Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (EPFL), Lausanne, Switzerland

    Andrea Ablasser

Authors
  1. Natasha Samson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andrea Ablasser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

A.A. developed the concept of the manuscript. N.S. contributed to the first draft of the manuscript and helped with the figures.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrea Ablasser.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

A.A. is the scientific cofounder of IFM Due, Boston, US.

Peer review information

Nature Cancer thanks Nan Yan, Samuel Bakhoum, and Philip J. Kranzusch 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.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Samson, N., Ablasser, A. The cGAS–STING pathway and cancer. Nat Cancer 3, 1452–1463 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43018-022-00468-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43018-022-00468-w

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Cancer

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Cancer newsletter — what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get what matters in cancer research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Cancer