1. Escudier, B. et al. CheckMate 025 randomized phase 3 study: Outcomes by key baseline factors and prior therapy for nivolumab
versus everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma. Eur. Urol. 72, 962–971 (2017).
2. Motzer, R. J. et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib in advanced renal-cell carcinoma. N. Engl. J. Med. 378, 1277–1290
(2018).
Scientific Reports |
Vol:.(1234567890)
(2023) 13:9994 |
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37234-6
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
3. Albiges, L. et al. Nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus sunitinib for first-line treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma: Extended
4-year follow-up of the phase III CheckMate 214 trial. ESMO Open 5, e001079 (2020).
4. Kitagawa, K. et al. An oral cancer vaccine using a Bifidobacterium vector suppresses tumor growth in a syngeneic mouse bladder
cancer model. Mol. Ther. Oncolytics 22, 592–603 (2021).
5. Nakagawa, N. et al. An oral WT1 protein vaccine composed of WT1-anchored, genetically engineered Bifidobacterium longum
allows for intestinal immunity in mice with acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00262-022-03214-4 (2022).
6. Takei, S. et al. Oral administration of genetically modified Bifidobacterium displaying HCV-NS3 multi-epitope fusion protein
could induce an HCV-NS3-specific systemic immune response in mice. Vaccine 32, 3066–3074 (2014).
7. Cheever, M. A. et al. The prioritization of cancer antigens: A national cancer institute pilot project for the acceleration of translational research. Clin. Cancer Res. 15, 5323–5337 (2009).
8. Nakatsuka, S.-I. et al. Immunohistochemical detection of WT1 protein in a variety of cancer cells. Mod. Pathol. 19, 804–814 (2006).
9. Yang, L., Han, Y., Suarez Saiz, F. & Minden, M. D. A tumor suppressor and oncogene: The WT1 story. Leukemia 21, 868–876 (2007).
10. Scharnhorst, V., van der Eb, A. J. & Jochemsen, A. G. WT1 proteins: Functions in growth and differentiation. Gene 273, 141–161
(2001).
11. Ueda, Y. et al. Phase 1/2 study of the WT1 peptide cancer vaccine WT4869 in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome. Cancer
Sci. 108, 2445–2453 (2017).
12. Iiyama, T. et al. WT1 (Wilms’ tumor 1) peptide immunotherapy for renal cell carcinoma. Microbiol. Immunol. 51, 519–530 (2007).
13. Kitagawa, K. et al. Development of oral cancer vaccine using recombinant Bifidobacterium displaying Wilms’ tumor 1 protein.
Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 66, 787–798 (2017).
14. Kitagawa, K. et al. Preclinical development of a WT1 oral cancer vaccine using a bacterial vector to treat castration-resistant
prostate cancer. Mol. Cancer Ther. 18, 980–990 (2019).
15. Hiramatsu, Y. et al. Orally administered Bifidobacterium triggers immune responses following capture by CD11c(+) cells in Peyer’s
patches and cecal patches. Cytotechnology 63, 307–317 (2011).
16. Halsey, T., Ologun, G., Wargo, J. & Jenq, R. R. Uncovering the role of the gut microbiota in immune checkpoint blockade therapy:
A mini-review. Semin. Hematol. 57, 13–18 (2020).
17. Quhal, F. et al. First-line immunotherapy-based combinations for metastatic renal cell carcinoma: A systematic review and network
meta-analysis. Eur. Urol. Oncol. 4, 755–765 (2021).
18. Jia, H. et al. The expression of FOXP3 and its role in human cancers. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Rev. Cancer 1871, 170–178 (2019).
19. Whiteside, T. L. FOXP3+ Treg as a therapeutic target for promoting anti-tumor immunity. Expert Opin. Ther. Targets 22, 353–363
(2018).
20. Sakaguchi, S., Miyara, M., Costantino, C. M. & Hafler, D. A. FOXP3+ regulatory T cells in the human immune system. Nat. Rev.
Immunol. 10, 490–500 (2010).
21. Miyara, M. et al. Functional delineation and differentiation dynamics of human CD4+ T cells expressing the FoxP3 transcription
factor. Immunity 30, 899–911 (2009).
22. Saleh, R. & Elkord, E. FoxP3+ T regulatory cells in cancer: Prognostic biomarkers and therapeutic targets. Cancer Lett. 490, 174–185
(2020).
23. Tanaka, A. & Sakaguchi, S. Targeting Treg cells in cancer immunotherapy. Eur. J. Immunol. 49, 1140–1146 (2019).
24. Routy, B. et al. The gut microbiota influences anticancer immunosurveillance and general health. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 15, 382–396
(2018).
25. Matson, V. et al. The commensal microbiome is associated with anti-PD-1 efficacy in metastatic melanoma patients. Science 359,
104–108 (2018).
26. Routy, B. et al. Gut microbiome influences efficacy of PD-1-based immunotherapy against epithelial tumors. Science 359, 91–97
(2018).
27. Iida, N. et al. Commensal bacteria control cancer response to therapy by modulating the tumor microenvironment. Science 342,
967–970 (2013).
28. Tanoue, T. et al. A defined commensal consortium elicits CD8 T cells and anti-cancer immunity. Nature 565, 600–605 (2019).
29. Kawanabe-Matsuda, H. et al. Dietary lactobacillus-derived exopolysaccharide enhances immune-checkpoint blockade therapy.
Cancer Discov. 12, 1336–1355 (2022).
30. Badgeley, A., Anwar, H., Modi, K., Murphy, P. & Lakshmikuttyamma, A. Effect of probiotics and gut microbiota on anti-cancer
drugs: Mechanistic perspectives. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Rev. Cancer 1875, 188494 (2021).
31. Mager, L. F. et al. Microbiome-derived inosine modulates response to checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy. Science 369, 1481–1489
(2020).
32. Sugahara, H. et al. Probiotic Bifidobacterium longum alters gut luminal metabolism through modification of the gut microbial
community. Sci. Rep. 5, 13548 (2015).
33. Furusawa, Y. et al. Commensal microbe-derived butyrate induces the differentiation of colonic regulatory T cells. Nature 504,
446–450 (2013).
34. Yaeshima, T. et al. Effect of yogurt containing bifidobacterium longum BB536 on the intestinal environment, fecal characteristics
and defecation frequenc. Biosci. Microflora 16, 73–77 (1997).
35. Namba, K., Yaeshima, T., Ishibashi, N., Hayasawa, H. & Yamazaki, S. Inhibitory Effects ofBifidobacterium longumon EnterohemorrhagicEscherichia coliO157: H7. Biosci. Microflora 22, 85–91 (2003).
36. Kobayashi, H. et al. Defining MHC class II T helper epitopes for WT1 tumor antigen. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 55, 850–860
(2006).
37. Gaiger, A., Reese, V., Disis, M. L. & Cheever, M. A. Immunity to WT1 in the animal model and in patients with acute myeloid
leukemia. Blood 96, 1480–1489 (2000).
38. Sugiyama, H. Cancer immunotherapy targeting Wilms’ tumor gene WT1 product. Expert Rev. Vaccines 4, 503–512 (2005).
39. Takahashi, S., Tomita, J., Nishioka, K., Hisada, T. & Nishijima, M. Development of a prokaryotic universal primer for simultaneous
analysis of Bacteria and Archaea using next-generation sequencing. PLoS ONE 9, e105592 (2014).
40. Hisada, T., Endoh, K. & Kuriki, K. Inter- and intra-individual variations in seasonal and daily stabilities of the human gut microbiota in Japanese. Arch. Microbiol. 197, 919–934 (2015).
41. Martin, M. Cutadapt removes adapter sequences from high-throughput sequencing reads. EMBnet. J. 17, 10–12 (2011).
42. Aronesty, E. Comparison of sequencing utility programs. Open Bioinforma. J. 7, 1–8 (2013).
43. Gordon A, H. G. J. FASTX-Toolkit FASTQ/A short-reads preprocessing tools. http://h
annon
lab.c shl.e du/f astx_t oolki t/i ndex.h
tml.
44. Caporaso, J. G. et al. QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data. Nat. Methods 7, 335–336 (2010).
45. Edgar, R. C., Haas, B. J., Clemente, J. C., Quince, C. & Knight, R. UCHIME improves sensitivity and speed of chimera detection.
Bioinformatics 27, 2194–2200 (2011).
46. Wang, Q., Garrity, G. M., Tiedje, J. M. & Cole, J. R. Naive Bayesian classifier for rapid assignment of rRNA sequences into the new
bacterial taxonomy. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 73, 5261–5267 (2007).
47. Kasai, C. et al. Comparison of the gut microbiota composition between obese and non-obese individuals in a Japanese population,
as analyzed by terminal restriction fragment length polymorphism and next-generation sequencing. BMC Gastroenterol. 15, 100
(2015).
Scientific Reports |
(2023) 13:9994 |
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37234-6
Vol.:(0123456789)
www.nature.com/scientificreports/
Author contributions
Research conception and design: H.U., T.S. Data acquisition: H.U., K.K., M.K., S.Y. Statistical analysis: H.U. Data
analysis and interpretation: H.U. Drafting of the manuscript: H.U. Writing of the manuscript: H.U., T.S. Critical
revision of the manuscript: M.F., T.S. Obtaining funding: None. Administrative, technical, or material support:
None. Supervision: T.H., Y.O., Y.B., T.T., J.F., Y.N., M.F. Approval of the final manuscript: M.F., T.S.
Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/
10.1038/s41598-023-37234-6.
Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to T.S.
Reprints and permissions information is available at www.nature.com/reprints.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and
institutional affiliations.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or
format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the
Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this
article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the
material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not
permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from
the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
© The Author(s) 2023
Scientific Reports |
Vol:.(1234567890)
(2023) 13:9994 |
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37234-6
10
...
論文の公開元へ
