Back

High-motility pro-tumorigenic monocytes drive macrophage enrichment in the tumor microenvironment

Du, W.; Zhou, B.; Forjaz, A.; Shin, S. M.; Wu, F.; Crawford, A. J.; Nair, P. R.; Johnston, A. C.; West-Foyle, H.; Tang, A.; Kim, D.; Fan, R.; Kiemen, A. L.; Wu, P.-H.; Phillip, J. M.; Ho, W. J.; Sanin, D. E.; Wirtz, D.

2024-07-18 immunology
10.1101/2024.07.16.603739 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Enrichment of tumor-associated macrophages (TAM{Phi}s) in the tumor microenvironment correlates with worse clinical outcomes in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients, prompting the development of therapies to inhibit TAM{Phi} infiltration. However, the lackluster efficacy of CCL2-based chemotaxis blockade in clinical trials suggests that a new understanding of monocyte/macrophage infiltration may be necessary. Here we demonstrate that random migration, and not only chemotaxis, drives macrophage tumor infiltration. We identified tumor- associated monocytes (TAMos) that display a dramatically enhanced migration capability, induced rapidly by the tumor microenvironment, that drives effective tumor infiltration, in contrast to low-motility differentiated macrophages. TAMo, not TAM{Phi}, promotes cancer cell proliferation through activation of the MAPK pathway. IL-6 secreted both by cancer cells and TAMo themselves enhances TAMo migration by increasing dendritic protrusion dynamics and myosin- based contractility via the JAK2/STAT3 signaling pathway. Independent from CCL2 mediated chemotaxis, IL-6 driven enhanced migration and pro-proliferative effect of TAMo were validated in a syngeneic TNBC mouse model. Depletion of IL-6 in cancer cells significantly attenuated monocyte infiltration and reversed TAMo-induced cancer cell proliferation. This work reveals the critical role random migration plays in monocyte driven TAM{Phi} enrichment in a tumor and pinpoints IL-6 as a potential therapeutic target in combination with CCL2 to ameliorate current strategies against TAM{Phi} infiltration.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.