Since the discovery that cGAS/STING recognizes endogenous DNA released from dying cancer cells and induces type I interferon and antitumor T cell responses, efforts to understand and therapeutically target the STING pathway in cancer have ensued. Relative to other cancer types, the glioma immune microenvironment harbors few infiltrating T cells, but abundant tumor-associated myeloid cells, possibly explaining disappointing responses to immune checkpoint blockade therapies in cohorts of patients with glioblastoma. Notably, unlike most extracranial tumors, STING expression is absent in the malignant compartment of gliomas, likely due to methylation of the STING promoter. Nonetheless, several preclinical studies suggest that inducing cGAS/STING signaling in the glioma immune microenvironment could be therapeutically beneficial, and cGAS/STING signaling has been shown to mediate inflammatory and antitumor effects of other modalities either in use or being developed for glioblastoma therapy, including radiation, tumor-treating fields, and oncolytic virotherapy. In this Review, we discuss cGAS/STING signaling in gliomas, its implications for glioma immunobiology, compartment-specific roles for STING signaling in influencing immune surveillance, and efforts to target STING signaling — either directly or indirectly — for antiglioma therapy.
Justin T. Low, Michael C. Brown, Zachary J. Reitman, Joshua D. Bernstock, James M. Markert, Gregory K. Friedman, Matthew S. Waitkus, Michelle L. Bowie, David M. Ashley
Usage data is cumulative from January 2024 through May 2024.
Usage | JCI | PMC |
---|---|---|
Text version | 3,391 | 547 |
622 | 153 | |
Figure | 334 | 1 |
Citation downloads | 63 | 0 |
Totals | 4,410 | 701 |
Total Views | 5,111 |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.