From pain to tumor immunity: influence of peripheral sensory neurons in cancer

The nervous and immune systems are the primary sensory interfaces of the body, allowing it to recognize, process, and respond to various stimuli from both the external and internal environment. These systems work in concert through various mechanisms of neuro-immune crosstalk to detect threats, provide defense against pathogens, and maintain or restore homeostasis, but can also contribute to the development of diseases. Among peripheral sensory neurons (PSNs), nociceptive PSNs are of particular interest. They possess a remarkable capability to detect noxious stimuli in the periphery and transmit this information to the brain, resulting in the perception of pain and the activation of adaptive responses. Pain is an early symptom of cancer, often leading to its diagnosis, but it is also a major source of distress for patients as the disease progresses. In this review, we aim to provide an overview of the mechanisms within tumors that are likely to induce cancer pain, exploring a range of factors from etiological elements to cellular and molecular mediators. In addition to transmitting sensory information to the central nervous system, PSNs are also capable, when activated, to produce and release neuropeptides (e.g., CGRP and SP) from their peripheral terminals. These neuropeptides have been shown to modulate immunity in cases of inflammation, infection, and cancer. PSNs, often found within solid tumors, are likely to play a significant role in the tumor microenvironment, potentially influencing both tumor growth and anti-tumor immune responses. In this review, we discuss the current state of knowledge about the degree of sensory innervation in tumors. We also seek to understand whether and how PSNs may influence the tumor growth and associated anti-tumor immunity in different mouse models of cancer. Finally, we discuss the extent to which the tumor is able to influence the development and functions of the PSNs that innervate it.

The nerve cells in gastrointestinal cancers: from molecular mechanisms to clinical intervention

Gastrointestinal (GI) cancer is a formidable malignancy with significant morbidity and mortality rates. Recent studies have shed light on the complex interplay between the nervous system and the GI system, influencing various aspects of GI tumorigenesis, such as the malignance of cancer cells, the conformation of tumor microenvironment (TME), and the resistance to chemotherapies. The discussion in this review first focused on exploring the intricate details of the biological function of the nervous system in the development of the GI tract and the progression of tumors within it. Meanwhile, the cancer cell-originated feedback regulation on the nervous system is revealed to play a crucial role in the growth and development of nerve cells within tumor tissues. This interaction is vital for understanding the complex relationship between the nervous system and GI oncogenesis. Additionally, the study identified various components within the TME that possess a significant influence on the occurrence and progression of GI cancer, including microbiota, immune cells, and fibroblasts. Moreover, we highlighted the transformation relationship between non-neuronal cells and neuronal cells during GI cancer progression, inspiring the development of strategies for nervous system-guided anti-tumor drugs. By further elucidating the deep mechanism of various neuroregulatory signals and neuronal intervention, we underlined the potential of these targeted drugs translating into effective therapies for GI cancer treatment. In summary, this review provides an overview of the mechanisms of neuromodulation and explores potential therapeutic opportunities, providing insights into the understanding and management of GI cancers.

Expression of Murine IL-12 Is Regulated by Translational Control of the p35 Subunit

IL-12 is a heterodimer of two subunits, p35 and p40, encoded by separate genes that are regulated independently. To investigate the mechanisms underlying the regulation of the p35 gene, we characterized murine p35 expression in the B cell lymphoma line A20 and in bone marrow-derived dendritic cells. Multiple transcription start sites were identified in both cell types, resulting in four p35 mRNA isoforms (types I–IV) that differ in the number and position of upstream ATGs in their 5′ untranslated regions. In nonstimulated cells, the predominant forms of p35 message (types II and IV) contained an additional upstream ATG, whose presence was shown to inhibit the downstream translation of the p35 subunit. After LPS stimulation, however, transcription initiated from alternate positions, so that the proportion of transcripts not containing this upstream ATG (types I and III) was significantly increased in the population of p35 mRNA. These type I and type III transcripts readily supported translation of the p35 subunit and its incorporation into bioactive IL-12. Furthermore, p35 mRNA levels were substantially up-regulated after LPS stimulation in both cell types. Thus, our results show that p35 gene expression is highly regulated by both transcriptional and translational mechanisms.

IFN-α Priming of Human Monocytes Differentially Regulates Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Bacteria-Induced IL-10 Release and Selectively Enhances IL-12p70, CD80, and MHC Class I Expression

Administration of IFN-γ and IFN-α may protect or induce autoimmune diseases. Although the in vitro regulation of monokine secretion by IFN-γ have been extensively studied, the regulatory function of IFN-α has not yet been elucidated. We compared IFN-α and IFN-γ, added alone or simultaneously before bacterial stimulation, for the control of monokine release and the expression of costimulatory molecules by human monocytes. Our data show that: 1) IFN-α primes monocytes for increased production of IL-10 in response to Staphylococcus aureus Cowan I strain (SAC) but not to LPS, leading to a lack of IFN-α priming for TNF-α secretion; 2) pretreatment of monocytes with IFN-α inhibits LPS- or SAC-induced IL-12p40 production but unexpectedly enhances the release of the biologically active form of IL-12 (IL-12p70); 3) IFN-α and IFN-γ exert an antagonistic effect on LPS- and SAC-induced IL-10 as well as IL-12p40 release, whereas they further enhance IL-12p70 production when added simultaneously; 4) in contrast to IFN-α, IFN-γ primes monocytes to enhance LPS- or SAC-induced TNF-α and IL-12 production, but surprisingly, it increases IL-10 production by monocytes following LPS but not SAC stimulation; and finally, 5) IFN-α pretreatment selectively up-regulates CD80 and MHC class I expression on monocytes. It is proposed that the outcome of the immune response at the site of inflammation may depend on both the type of bacterial injury (Gram-positive or -negative) and of locally produced IFNs, and that the differential and opposite effects of type I and type II IFNs on monocytes may account for the beneficial or detrimental effects of IFN-α therapy.