Back

T cell-Macrophage Interactions Potentially Influence Chemotherapeutic Response in Ovarian Cancer Patients.

Hameed, S. A.; kolch, W.; Zhernovkov, V.

2026-03-04 bioinformatics
10.64898/2026.03.02.709041 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Tumor development and progression involve complex cell-cell interactions and dynamic co-evolution between cancer cells, immune cells and stromal cells in the tumour microenvironment, and this may influence therapeutic resistance. A large proportion of this network relies on direct physical interactions between cells, particularly T-cell mediated interactions. Cell-cell communication inference has now become routine in downstream scRNAseq analysis, but this mostly fails to capture physical cell-cell interactions due to tissue dissociation. Doublets occur naturally in scRNA-seq and are usually excluded from analysis. However, they may represent directly interacting cells that remain undissociated during library preparation. In the present study, we uncover the physical interaction landscape of the ovarian tumour microenvironment using the scRNAseq datasets from 13 treatment-naive ovarian cancer patients. Focusing on T-cell-Macrophage (T-Mac) interaction doublet, we reveal the modulatory effect of macrophages on T cells and the potential influence of this interaction on therapeutic response. Our findings show that T-Macs from resistant patients are functionally polarized to the M2 phenotype and engage T cells to induce T-cell exhaustion. Whereas, T-Macs from sensitive patients are predominantly of the M1 polarized phenotype, physically engaging T cells that lack exhaustion signatures. We also demonstrate that T cells and macrophages in T-Mac doublet are interacting primarily for the purpose of antigen presentation, with the enrichment of several ligand-receptor pairs involved in TCR-MHC interactions and immune synapse formations. We partly validated some of these findings from a spatial transcriptomics dataset of ovarian cancer patients from a separate cohort.

Matching journals

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

1
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
16.9%
2
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 2%
16.9%
3
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 10%
7.9%
4
Cell Systems
167 papers in training set
Top 4%
3.5%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 39%
3.5%
6
Cancer Research
116 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
50% of probability mass above
7
Communications Biology
886 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.5%
8
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 43%
3.0%
9
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 18%
2.8%
10
npj Systems Biology and Applications
99 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.5%
11
Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology
218 papers in training set
Top 3%
2.0%
12
Advanced Science
249 papers in training set
Top 9%
2.0%
13
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 9%
2.0%
14
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.8%
15
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.8%
16
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.8%
17
EMBO reports
136 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
18
Cell Genomics
162 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.6%
19
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.6%
20
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 6%
1.4%
21
Cell Communication and Signaling
35 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.9%
22
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 42%
0.9%
23
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 29%
0.8%
24
Cancer Research Communications
46 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
25
Patterns
70 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.7%
26
Cancer Cell
38 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
27
Communications Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.7%
28
Genome Research
409 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
29
Journal of Bioinformatics and Systems Biology
14 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.6%