Immunological Surveillance of Tumors in the Context of Major Histocompatibility Complex Restriction of T Cell Function

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-230X(08)60455-8Get rights and content

Publisher Summary

The immunological surveillance hypothesis was formulated prior to the realization of the fact that an individual's effector T cells generally see neoantigen if it is appropriately presented in the context of self major histocompatibility complex (MHC) glycoproteins. The biological consequence of this mechanism is that T lymphocytes are focused onto modified cell-surface rather than onto free antigen. The discovery of MHC-restricted T cell recognition and the realization that T cell-mediated immunity is of prime importance in promoting recovery from infectious processes has, thus, changed the whole emphasis of the surveillance argument. T cell surveillance probably operates well in some situations, but is quite ineffective in many others. Part of the reason for this may be that the host response selects tumor clones that are modified so as to be no longer recognized by cytotoxic T cells. The possibility that this reflects changes in MHC phenotype has been investigated and found to be the case for some experimental tumors. The availability of molecular probes for investigating the status of MHC genes in tumor cells—together with the capacity to develop cloned T cell lines, monoclonal antibodies to putative tumor antigens, and cell lines transfected with genes coding for these molecules—indicates the way T cell surveillance may profitably be explored further in both experimental and human situations.

References (417)

  • M. Allouche et al.

    Cell. Immunol.

    (1982)
  • D. Baltimore

    Cell

    (1981)
  • B. Benacerraf et al.

    Adv. Cancer Res.

    (1975)
  • J.A. Bluestone et al.

    Immunol. Today

    (1983)
  • R.K. Cohen et al.

    Cell Immunol.

    (1977)
  • P.C. Doherty
  • P.C. Doherty et al.

    Lancet

    (1975)
  • J. Abramczuk et al.

    J. Virol.

    (1984)
  • S.R. Abromson-Leeman et al.

    J. Exp. Med.

    (1983)
  • G.L. Ada
  • G.L. Ada et al.

    Immunol. Rev.

    (1981)
  • L. Ahrlund-Richter et al.

    Immunogenetics

    (1982)
  • L. Ahrlund-Richter et al.

    Immunogenetics

    (1983)
  • A.C. Allison
  • A.C. Allison et al.

    Nature (London)

    (1974)
  • J.P. Allison et al.

    J. Immunol.

    (1982)
  • D.B. Amos et al.

    Fed. Proc. Fed. Am. Soc. Exp. Biol.

    (1971)
  • K. Artzt et al.

    Transplantation

    (1976)
  • B.A. Askonas et al.

    Eur. J. Immunol.

    (1979)
  • B.A. Askonas et al.

    Immunology

    (1982)
  • F.H. Bach et al.

    Transplant. Proc.

    (1981)
  • F.H. Bach et al.

    Transplant. Proc.

    (1980)
  • D.W. Bailey

    Immunogenetics

    (1975)
  • D.W. Bailey et al.

    Genet. Res.

    (1965)
  • P. Baldacci et al.

    J. Exp. Med.

    (1983)
  • M.A. Barcinski et al.

    J. Exp. Med.

    (1977)
  • F. Barré-Sinoussi et al.

    Science

    (1983)
  • P.F. Bartlett et al.

    J. Cell Biol.

    (1978)
  • B. Benacerraf

    J. Immunol.

    (1978)
  • B. Benacerraf et al.

    Science

    (1973)
  • T.L. Benjamin (1983). BBA Rev. Cancer in...
  • J.R. Bennink et al.

    Nature (London)

    (1982)
  • M.J. Berendt et al.

    J. Exp. Med.

    (1980)
  • R. Bernards et al.

    Nature (London)

    (1983)
  • J.A. Berzofsky et al.

    J. Immunol.

    (1982)
  • H.O. Besedovsky et al.

    J. Exp. Med.

    (1979)
  • M.J. Bevan

    Nature (London)

    (1975)
  • M.J. Bevan

    J. Exp. Med.

    (1976)
  • M.J. Bevan

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

    (1977)
  • M.J. Bevan et al.

    Immunol. Rev.

    (1978)
  • G. Biasi et al.

    J. Immunol.

    (1983)
  • W.D.E. Biddison et al.

    J. Exp. Med.

    (1977)
  • P.M. Biggs

    Br. J. Cancer Suppl. II

    (1975)
  • H. Binz et al.

    Contemp. Top. Immunobiol.

    (1977)
  • H. Binz et al.

    J. Exp. Med.

    (1983)
  • B. Bjaring et al.

    J. Natl. Cancer Inst.

    (1968)
  • R.V. Blanden et al.

    Immunogenetics

    (1976)
  • R.V. Blanden et al.

    J. Exp. Med.

    (1979)
  • K. Blank et al.

    Nature (London)

    (1977)
  • W.F. Bodmer

    Nature (London)

    (1972)
  • Cited by (178)

    • Analyses and perspectives in cancer immunotherapy

      2006, Biomedicine and Pharmacotherapy
      Citation Excerpt :

      A number of factors that could influence the outcome of LAK-cell based therapy is subject of debates (see also below). Since it was observed both in animals and in humans, that many tumours elicit an immune response [13–16], efforts are focused on studies concerning the relevant antigen (i.e. tumour associated antigen or TAA) with the hope to mount an anti-tumour rejection reaction. In general, the term of antigen designed a component that triggered an immune response of the organism in contact with it.

    • The tumor microenvironment in the post-PAGET era

      2006, Cancer Letters
      Citation Excerpt :

      The interaction of immune components with tumor cells is a case in point. The concept of immune surveillance dominated, and still does, the research trends of cancer immunologists [105–109]. The logical conclusion of this concept is to boost immune responses and employ various forms of immunotherapy [110–122].

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text