Inhibitory receptors of plasmacytoid dendritic cells as possible targets for checkpoint blockade in cancer.

Plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs) are the major producers of type I interferons (IFNs), which are essential to mount antiviral and antitumoral immune responses. To avoid exaggerated levels of type I IFNs, which pave the way to immune dysregulation and autoimmunity, pDC activation is strictly regulated by a variety of inhibitory receptors (IRs). In tumors, pDCs display an exhausted phenotype and correlate with an unfavorable prognosis, which largely depends on the accumulation of immunosuppressive cytokines and oncometabolites. This review explores the hypothesis that tumor microenvironment may reduce the release of type I IFNs also by a more pDC-specific mechanism, namely the engagement of IRs. Literature shows that many cancer types express de novo , or overexpress, IR ligands (such as BST2, PCNA, CAECAM-1 and modified surface carbohydrates) which often represent a strong predictor of poor outcome and metastasis. In line with this, tumor cells expressing ligands engaging IRs such as BDCA-2, ILT7, TIM3 and CD44 block pDC activation, while this blocking is prevented when IR engagement or signaling is inhibited. Based on this evidence, we propose that the regulation of IFN secretion by IRs may be regarded as an "innate checkpoint", reminiscent of the function of "classical" adaptive immune checkpoints, like PD1 expressed in CD8+ T cells, which restrain autoimmunity and immunopathology but favor chronic infections and tumors. However, we also point out that further work is needed to fully unravel the biology of tumor-associated pDCs, the neat contribution of pDC exhaustion in tumor growth following the engagement of IRs, especially those expressed also by other leukocytes, and their therapeutic potential as targets of combined immune checkpoint blockade in cancer immunotherapy.
Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest. The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision. The reviewer VL declared a shared affiliation with the authors ML, GZ and SS to the handling editor at the time of review.
(Copyright © 2024 Tiberio, Laffranchi, Zucchi, Salvi, Schioppa, Sozzani, Del Prete and Bosisio.)