Tumor-Associated Macrophages and Ovarian Cancer: Implications for Therapy

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

The tumor microenvironment (TME) has been implicated to play an important role in the progression of ovarian cancer. One of the most important components of the TME is tumor associated macrophages (TAMs). Phenotypically, macrophages are broadly categorized as M1 pro-inflammatory or M2 anti-inflammatory, based on the cytokines and chemokines that they secrete. The tumor microenvironment is associated with macrophages of an M2 phenotype which suppress the surrounding immune environment, assist tumor cells in evading immune targeting, and support tumor growth and metastasis. Contrarily, M1 macrophages help mount an immune response against tumors, and are associated with a more favorable prognosis in solid tumors. One of the characteristic indicators of a poor prognosis in ovarian cancer is the overrepresentation of M2-type TAMs. As such, therapeutic modalities targeting TME and TAMs are of increasing interest. Pharmacological approaches to eliminate TAMs, include decreasing macrophage survival and recruitment and increasing phagocytosis, have been underwhelming. Clinical strategies targeting these macrophage subtypes via repolarization to an M1 antitumoral state deserve increasing attention, and may serve as a new modality for immunotherapy.

Related collections

Most cited references 154

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Is Open Access

Cancer statistics, 2022

Rebecca Siegel, Kimberly D Miller, Hannah Fuchs … (2022)

Each year, the American Cancer Society estimates the numbers of new cancer cases and deaths in the United States and compiles the most recent data on population-based cancer occurrence and outcomes. Incidence data (through 2018) were collected by the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program; the National Program of Cancer Registries; and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries. Mortality data (through 2019) were collected by the National Center for Health Statistics. In 2022, 1,918,030 new cancer cases and 609,360 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States, including approximately 350 deaths per day from lung cancer, the leading cause of cancer death. Incidence during 2014 through 2018 continued a slow increase for female breast cancer (by 0.5% annually) and remained stable for prostate cancer, despite a 4% to 6% annual increase for advanced disease since 2011. Consequently, the proportion of prostate cancer diagnosed at a distant stage increased from 3.9% to 8.2% over the past decade. In contrast, lung cancer incidence continued to decline steeply for advanced disease while rates for localized-stage increased suddenly by 4.5% annually, contributing to gains both in the proportion of localized-stage diagnoses (from 17% in 2004 to 28% in 2018) and 3-year relative survival (from 21% to 31%). Mortality patterns reflect incidence trends, with declines accelerating for lung cancer, slowing for breast cancer, and stabilizing for prostate cancer. In summary, progress has stagnated for breast and prostate cancers but strengthened for lung cancer, coinciding with changes in medical practice related to cancer screening and/or treatment. More targeted cancer control interventions and investment in improved early detection and treatment would facilitate reductions in cancer mortality.

0 comments Cited 5175 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Macrophage activation and polarization: nomenclature and experimental guidelines.

Peter Murray, Judith Allen, Subhra Biswas … (2014)

Description of macrophage activation is currently contentious and confusing. Like the biblical Tower of Babel, macrophage activation encompasses a panoply of descriptors used in different ways. The lack of consensus on how to define macrophage activation in experiments in vitro and in vivo impedes progress in multiple ways, including the fact that many researchers still consider there to be only two types of activated macrophages, often termed M1 and M2. Here, we describe a set of standards encompassing three principles-the source of macrophages, definition of the activators, and a consensus collection of markers to describe macrophage activation-with the goal of unifying experimental standards for diverse experimental scenarios. Collectively, we propose a common framework for macrophage-activation nomenclature. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

0 comments Cited 1346 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Macrophage plasticity and polarization: in vivo veritas.

Antonio Sica, Alberto Mantovani (2012)

Diversity and plasticity are hallmarks of cells of the monocyte-macrophage lineage. In response to IFNs, Toll-like receptor engagement, or IL-4/IL-13 signaling, macrophages undergo M1 (classical) or M2 (alternative) activation, which represent extremes of a continuum in a universe of activation states. Progress has now been made in defining the signaling pathways, transcriptional networks, and epigenetic mechanisms underlying M1-M2 or M2-like polarized activation. Functional skewing of mononuclear phagocytes occurs in vivo under physiological conditions (e.g., ontogenesis and pregnancy) and in pathology (allergic and chronic inflammation, tissue repair, infection, and cancer). However, in selected preclinical and clinical conditions, coexistence of cells in different activation states and unique or mixed phenotypes have been observed, a reflection of dynamic changes and complex tissue-derived signals. The identification of mechanisms and molecules associated with macrophage plasticity and polarized activation provides a basis for macrophage-centered diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.