Lung cancer immunotherapy: progress, pitfalls, and promises.

Introduction

Globally, cancer incidence and death are rising, with lung cancer being the most commonly diagnosed form of cancer (11.6% of the total cases). In the United States, in 2022, there are expected to be ~ 236,740 new lung cancer cases, with ~ 130,180 human demise [ 1 ]. Lung cancer remains the leading cause of global cancer mortalities (18.4% of total cancer fatalities), causing significant societal burden and economic loss [ 1 , 2 ]. Around 80% of lung cancer deaths are caused by smoking. Other risk factors for lung cancer include radon, asbestos, long-term and cumulative exposure to air pollution, especially polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) emissions, and personal or familial lung cancer history [ 3 , 4 ]. Lung tumors are divided into two broad categories by the World Health Organization (WHO); non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), comprising 80–85% of all lung cancer cases, and small cell lung cancer (SCLC), constituting the other 15% incidences [ 5 – 7 ]. NSCLC can be further subcategorized into adenocarcinoma (LUAD), squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC), and large cell carcinoma (LCC). Each subcategory based on the molecular targetable genetic profile can be subcategorized into several types [ 8 ]. It turns out that the survival rates for metastatic lung cancer of both NSCLC and SCLC types are poor, with a 5-year survival of only about 4% [ 9 , 10 ].

Although several anti-cancer strategies like surgery, chemotherapy, and irradiation are used to treat NSCLC and SCLC, there is an urgent need for effective strategies to cure or manage lung cancer, particularly late-stage cancers [ 11 ]. The prognosis of NSCLC is challenging due to the unavailability of a platform for early-stage diagnosis and the late appearance of symptoms in disease development, limiting treatment choices and survival [ 12 ]. Low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) is the gold standard for current lung cancer patient screening. So far, in the USA, only 5% of the 15 million high-risk individuals advised for screening have used LDCT. LDCT suffers from low early detection efficiency, false-positive detection, radiation hazard, and unavailability of resources for running an efficient CT-based screening program [ 13 ]. Though early detection increases the likelihood of tumor resection, treatment, and a successful outcome, the unavailability of an appropriate screening platform, metastatic nature, genetic heterogeneity, and minimal response to chemotherapy at late stages make lung cancer fatal [ 14 ]. However, chemotherapy and radiation are recommended (including neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant therapy) for locally advanced and metastatic cancers but have shown limited overall survival (OS) and toxic side effects. Targeted therapies along with chemotherapy have become standard therapies for NSCLC patients with actionable oncogenic alterations (driver mutations and fusions/rearrangements), resulting in increased progression-free survival (PFS) and the OS in several cases. Targeted therapies have differing side effect profiles compared to chemotherapy and may not necessarily have sustained treatment responses [ 15 , 16 ].

SCLC is classified based on the extension of the disease into a limited disease SCLC (LD-SCLC) and an extensive disease SCLC (ED-SCLC). Although new chemotherapeutic agents are being continuously formulated, the prognosis remains poor due to aggressive progression, lack of early detection techniques, limited treatment options, and efficacy [ 16 , 17 ]. For LD-SCLC, a standard strategy is chemotherapy (cisplatin or carboplatin with etoposide) combined with thoracic radiotherapy [ 18 ]. SCLC initially responds well to chemotherapy and radiation but often relapses, leading to poor survival. The median survival (MS) rate for this group of patients is approximately 7–12 months due to limited early detection modalities, dearth of tissue availability for clinical research, tumor genetic heterogeneity, and poor understanding of molecular mechanisms leading to rapid progression and therapeutic resistance [ 19 , 20 ]. Clinical studies of new drugs and targeted molecular treatment for SCLC have shown limited, encouraging results [ 5 , 21 ]. Hence, there is a pressing need for a new treatment modality with a persistent response.

Recent research has refined our understanding of the immune system's reaction to cancer and how to enhance it, leading to considerable improvements in cancer immunotherapy [ 22 ]. Immunotherapy possesses potential efficacy irrespective of the histology and driver mutational status, leading to sustained remission, especially for those patients who exhibit a response [ 23 ]. The goal of cancer immunotherapy is to elicit (or re-elicit) a cellular immune response, especially the T-cell-mediated tumor-specific antigen (TSA) and tumor-associated antigens (TAA)-directed cytotoxicity that can selectively destroy a tumor [ 24 ]. The immune-modulatory drugs can also counter cancer cells by increasing the concentration of tumor-specific antibodies, natural killer (NK) cells, dendritic cells (DCs), macrophages (MΦ), and cytokines in the blood plasma [ 25 ]. However, in the past few years, immunotherapy has been considered inapt for lung cancer due to minimal immune responses [ 26 ]. Lung cancer immunotherapy is challenging as the cells avoid immunosurveillance and reduce the overall immunological response by modulating the T-cell mediated cytotoxicity, secretion of immune-suppressive cytokines, and loss of major histocompatibility complex (MHC) expression [ 27 ]. Recent technical advances have helped determine the molecular granularity of lung cancer immunogenicity, and since then various types of immunotherapies have evolved for treating lung cancer. Immunotherapy treatment types include therapeutic vaccines, immune modulators, autologous cellular therapies, and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) directed against checkpoint inhibitor signals associated with activated T-cells and/or with cancer cells. However, since each therapeutic approach has distinct advantages and disadvantages, combining multiple therapies or therapeutic strategies with immunotherapy is preferable [ 28 ]. The present article examines recent advances in lung cancer (NSCLC and SCLC) immunotherapy, continuing clinical studies of immunotherapeutic interventions, and future directions.

NSCLC and immunotherapy

LUAD is the most prevalent NSCLC, especially in the USA, accounts for around 40% of all lung cancer, and occurs in smokers and non-smokers regardless of their age and sex [ 29 ]. LUAD arises from the glandular cells of the alveoli (tiny air sacs) and tends to occur in the peripheral regions of the lung [ 30 ]. Due to its slow development rate than other types of lung cancer, it is more likely to be detected before it metastasizes beyond the lungs [ 31 , 32 ]. LUSC is the second most common type of lung cancer, accounting for 25–30% of all lung cancer occurrences. LUSC is connected with smoking more than any other kind of NSCLC and is characterized by recurring somatically altered genes and pathways linked to smoking [ 33 , 34 ]. Tracheobronchial squamous cells, particularly the basal cells, often give birth to squamous cell lung tumors, which are found mostly in the central part of the lung (the major airways) but may also occur peripherally [ 33 , 34 ]. The third type, LCC accounts for approximately 5–10% of lung cancers and are also associated with smoking [ 35 ]. LCC generally shows no evidence of squamous or glandular maturation and remain undifferentiated, and as a result, it is often diagnosed through the exclusion of other possibilities. They habitually begin from the central part of the lungs, spread quickly, sometimes invading nearby lymph nodes, have chest wall involvement, and metastasize to distant organs [ 35 , 36 ]. The lung cancer staging project by the International Association for the study of Lung Cancer (IASLC) revealed that patients were more likely to survive if diagnosed and treated in the early pathological stage with an MS of 95 months for stage IA, 75 months for stage IB, 44 months for stage IIA, 29 months for stage IIB and 19 months for stage IIIA. Also, a considerable influence factor on OS was the subtype of tumor cells [83 months for Bronchoalveolar carcinoma (uncommon type of LUAD), 45 months for LUAD, 44 months for LUSC, 34 months for LCC, and 26 months for Adenosquamous carcinoma] [ 37 ]. However, with the recent awareness about smoking cessation and improvements in early diagnosis and treatment, mortality rates of lung cancer have steadily dropped during the last two decades [ 38 ]. Immunotherapy is one such treatment advancement that has impacted patient survival in lung cancer, especially NSCLC. In this regard, understanding and accumulation of know-how about the immune mechanisms, driver mutations, neoantigens, and oncogenic pathways involved in NSCLC have brought about more clarity regarding the heterogeneity of tumor, mutational burden, and tumor microenvironment (TME), which has aided in designing new immunotherapeutic tools for targetable mutations [ 39 ].

The lung cancer genome is characterized by a unique mutational landscape. Specific oncogenic mutations confer a dominant gain of function and recessive loss of function mutations in tumor suppressor genes. Somatic mutations, homozygous gene deletions, gene amplifications, gene translocations, and epigenetic silencing may cause genomic changes and alterations in specific pathways leading to the transformation of normal cells to premalignant cells and finally into lung tumors [ 40 ]. Lung cancer genetic profiling indicated considerable patient heterogeneity. It has been possible to identify several oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes (Fig. 1 ). KRAS, ALK, c-MET, RET, BRAF V600E, ROS1, NTRK, TP53, and ERBB2 (HER2) [ 40 ] are among the actionable genetic changes found in NSCLC. Genomic alteration-associated generation of tumor-specific antigens or neoantigens expressed by the premalignant/tumor cells, following antigen-presenting cell (APC)-mediated antigen presentation, can activate the T-cell specific adaptive antitumor immune response. The three-signal activation dogma governs classical T-cell activation. APCs display antigenic peptides on MHC I molecules to naïve T cells via their cognate T-cell receptor (TCR) (signal 1). A positive costimulatory signal, termed signal 2 (interaction of DC-specific CD80/86 and T cells-specific CD28 receptor), is essential for T cell activation. DCs further secrete pro-inflammatory cytokines (signal 3) to induce T cells toward antigen-specific antitumor response (Fig. 2 A) [ 40 ]. These primed and activated effector T cells can infiltrate lung TME and effects tumor cell killing. When placed in the context of the inflammatory milieu of the tumor, signal 3 may help clarify the connection between chronic inflammation and lung cancer. The expression of the immune checkpoints is linked to several of the genetic modifications, like TP53, KRAS, and STK11 gene mutations. The details of the genetic underpinnings of lung cancer are covered in other reviews and chapters [ 40 , 41 ]. Fig. 1 Genetic profiling of lung cancer (SCLC, LUAD, and LUSC) have shown changes in several oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes. Based on the total of somatic mutations, homozygous deletions, localized amplification, and substantial changes in gene expression, the values in each box represent the rates of genomic abnormalities. Other crucial proteins that mediate the pathways are also discussed. EGF, epidermal growth factor; FGF, fibroblast growth factor; GF, growth factor; DLL, deltalike; EGF, epidermal growth factor; FGF, fibroblast growth factor; GF, growth factor; HGF, hepatocyte growth factor; NRG, neuregulin; RTK, receptor tyrosine kinase. Figure reproduced with permission from Reference 39 Fig. 2 Immune interaction between T-cells, APCs, and cancer cells A . Schematic representing the mechanism of antigen-specific T cell activation. DCs play a crucial role in anti-tumor immunity due to their exceptional capacity to activate T cells following the central dogma of three signals. S1: Signal 1; S2: Signal 2; S3: Signal 3; TME: Tumor microenvironment; DC: Dendritic cell. B . Schematic showing immune interaction between T cell and APC; T cell with tumor cells. The T cell co-inhibitory and co-stimulatory molecules are shown in black and red fonts respectively. APC: Antigen presenting cell, L: Ligand

Lung cancer immunotherapy, which aids the immune system in identifying and eliminating cancer cells, has gotten much attention lately. The nature of the interaction of tumor cells with the immune cells in the TME defines the antitumor response. Recent studies exemplify a dichotomous role of the immune cells during lung tumor evolution and can either promote an anti-tumor response or modulate an immunosuppressive (pro-tumorigenic) TME [ 42 , 43 ]. TME is a complex signal interaction space surrounding the tumor, constituted by the endothelial cells, stromal fibroblast, mesenchymal cells, adipocytes, immune cells, and the extracellular matrix. The composition and the pathological significance of the tumor immune microenvironment (TIME) have been a topic of intense investigation in the last decade. The discovery of immune checkpoints (ICP), which are proteins produced by some immune cells (like T cells) and cancer cells, is an unprecedented moment in the history of immunotherapy. Under normal physiological conditions, the ICPs bind with their complementary companion proteins (receptor-ligand interaction), activate inhibitory signals, turn off T cell response, and.

thereby preventing an indiscriminate attack on healthy cells. They are crucial for self-tolerance, normal regulation of the immune system, and immunostasis. Tumor cells use this crucial regulatory process to their advantage and express ICP proteins to evade immune cell-mediated tumor cell death. Targeting the immune checkpoint using checkpoint inhibitors (CKI) can lead to long-term clinical response and cancer cure. Since the discovery of CTLA-4, several ICPs have been discovered, including programmed death-1 (PD-1), T-cell immunoglobulin domain and mucin domain-containing molecule-3 (TIM-3), T-cell immunoglobulin and ITIM domain (TIGIT), B and T cell lymphocyte attenuator (BTLA), lymphocyte activation gene (LAG3), V-domain Ig suppressor of T cell activation (VISTA), and Cluster of Differentiation 200 (CD200) (Fig. 2 B) [ 40 ].

Interaction of PD1 (expressed on effector T cells) with PD-L1 (expressed by tumor cells and TME-associated myeloid cells) acts as an inhibitory signal and causes effector T cell exhaustion. While CTLA-4 is upregulated in activated T cells and competes with the co-stimulatory CD80/86 expressed on APCs, thereby negatively affecting T cell activation and function. While PD-1 and CTLA-4 are the most studied ICPs, other ICPs may be effective. Tumor cell-expressed ligands (CD155, CD112) binds to TIGIT and impact T cell- and NK-cell-mediated tumor recognition. TIM3 and LAG3 inactivate T cell function and induce exhaustion (Fig. 2 B) [ 15 , 40 ]. A schematic showing immune interaction between T cell and APC; T cell with tumor cells is shown in Fig. 2 B. Loss of CD4 + T cells and an increase in the expression of inhibitory receptors such as CD160, CD244, CTLA4, LAG-3, PD1, TIGIT, and TIM3, leads to a rapid decline in T cell effector activity. Advanced technologies have provided a comprehensive understanding of the complexity of the tumor-immune interactions. By parsing the distinct type of tumor-specific TIME, immunotherapeutic responsiveness may be predicted, and novel therapeutic targets can be identified for developing successful therapies.

CKIs as a therapy for advanced lung cancer have lately gained traction. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2015 approved Nivolumab (blocks PD-1) for the treatment of LUSC (and subsequently for all NSCLC histological types) after the first-line treatment with platinum doublet chemotherapy had failed. Under normal conditions, the immune checkpoint receptor programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) is expressed on activated T cells. PD-1 inhibits immunological responses from being overstimulated, while its ligand, PD-L1, is expressed on immune cells and tumor cells. The PD-1/PD-L1 pathway interaction contributes significantly to tumor immune evasion. The anti-tumor immunity mediated by T cells is resurrected by inhibiting their connection, offering a survival advantage in various advanced, resistant cancers. For patients with PD-L1 positive cancers who had progressed after chemotherapy, Pembrolizumab was approved in 2015. In October 2016, the FDA authorized pembrolizumab as first-line therapy for patients with high (≥ 50%) PD-L1 expression. Atezolizumab was approved for use in patients with advanced NSCLC who had progressed after chemotherapy. Research on the role of the immune system in the treatment and prevention of cancer has been substantial. Immunotherapy is now a trendy topic, thanks to a flurry of FDA approvals. Immunotherapy encompasses cancer vaccines, MAbs, and adoptive cell transfer in addition to checkpoint inhibitors and will be discussed in further detail in the subsequent sections.

Tumor-specific vaccines

For long, vaccines have been old arsenals in medicine, primarily used to prevent the onset and spread of infectious disease, and to a smaller degree have been applied in oncology. The vaccines aim to promote antigen-specific immune responses in a patient by presenting TAAs to the individual’s immune system in the cancer environment [ 44 ]. Vaccine therapy aims to initiate or amplify adaptive anti-tumor immune responses by introducing tumor antigens to stimulate the host immune system to generate tumor antigen-specific effector and memory T-cell-based responses and not target non-malignant cells [ 45 – 47 ]. Vaccines targeting NSCLC have been investigated in several phase III trials throughout the last decade. Although they had a favorable toxicity profile and tolerability, almost all of them could not demonstrate survival advantages despite encouraging results in the preliminary phase II randomized trials. Tumor vaccination faces multiple challenges, and addressing them can lead to the path of therapeutic translation. Cancer vaccines suffer from limited penetrability in the tumor, wayning of the immuneresponse over time, and resistance. Multi-target vaccines generated against immunogenicity-optimized epitopes may address some of these challenges. Therefore, a greater knowledge of immune evasion mechanisms, designing effective formulations, and combination immunotherapy approaches (targeting TME and tumor cell-derived factors) can promote the development of the subsequent generation of cancer vaccines. The currently investigated vaccines, classified broadly into antigen-specific vaccines (peptide /protein vaccines, DNA vaccines, and vector-based vaccines) or whole-cell vaccines (allogeneic vaccines and autologous dendritic cell vaccines), are discussed in brief below (Fig. 3 A). Fig. 3 Different aspects of lung cancer immunotherapy. A : Lung cancer immunotherapy by using a tumor-specific vaccine to combat cancer. B : Donor or patient T cells are collected in vitro, followed by the introduction of Chimeric Antigen Receptor (CAR) receptors and mass-produced in the lab to combat cancer. Following infusion back to the patient, the CAR T-cells attack the patient's tumor. C : Oncolytic virus and lung cancer cell oncolysis. D : Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) may be effective against lung cancer by targeting a specific section of the cancer cell

Peptide/protein vaccines

The few protein-specific vaccines used in NSCLC are the CIMAvax epidermal growth factor (CIMAvax-EGF) vaccine, MAGE-A3, NY-ESO-1 and the BLP25 liposome vaccine (anti-MUC1). The CIMAvax-EGF, developed in Cuba, is a chemical conjugation of EGF with the P64 protein obtained from Meningitis B bacteria and the incomplete Freund's adjuvant Montanide ISA 51 [ 48 ]. The vaccine induces immune responses specifically against EGF, a molecular driver of cancer cells, aiming to block their proliferation. Its use is currently approved in the countries like Cuba, Peru, and Venezuela for treating stage IIIB and IV NSCLC patients who have progressed beyond the first line of chemotherapy. The CIMAvax-EGF was shown to be safe and immunogenic in patients with advanced NSCLC in a phase II randomized controlled study including 80 stage IIIB/IV NSCLC patients who had received a first-line chemotherapy [ 49 ]. Promising anti-EGF antibody response was documented in 51.3% of the vaccinated patients, and they survived significantly longer (11.7 months MS) than those that showed poor antibody response (3.6 months MS). Adverse events were recorded in fewer than a quarter of grades 1 and 2 patients. Subsequently, a phase III study was published in August 2016, showing the results of OS, safety, immunogenicity, and serum EGF concentration of 405 stage IIIB/IV NSCLC patients post-CIMAvax-EGF vaccination [ 50 ]. After completion of the first line of chemotherapy, patients were randomly assigned at a ratio of 2:1 for the vaccine with best supportive care (BSC) or to the control group. The survival was statistically higher (HR, 0.77; P = 0.036) in the treatment arm with an MS of 12.4 months for the vaccinated group contrasted with 9.4 months for the control patients. In January 2017, a new randomized phase I/II clinical trial against NSCLC with CIMAvax-EGF combined with the MAB Nivolumab ( NCT02955290 ) began, for which the results are awaited.

Another type of protein targeting tumor vaccines is the ones that targets the cancer testis antigens (CTA) that include the New York oesophageal squamous cell cancer (NY-ESO-1) and the melanoma-associated antigen-A3 (MAGE-A3) antigens in case of NSCLC. The normal expression of CTA is primarily found in the male germ cells in the testis and rarely in the female ovary and trophoblast, while in some cases, due to genetic mutations, they become upregulated in a proportion of different malignant tumor types [ 51 ]. The MAGE was the first CTA to be identified, and its expression is evident in almost 30%—50% of NSCLC patients, especially in LUSC incidences [ 52 , 53 ]. The phase III MAGRIT study evaluated the safety of a recombinant adjuvanted MAGE-A3 in patients with resected MAGE-A3 positive NSCLC. The trial included 2,312 patients with resected stage IB, IIA, or IIIA NSCLC. The vaccine comprises a recombinant protein comprising the MAGE-A3 and the fusion protein D of Haemophilus influenzae, along with the vaccine adjuvant AS02B. The trial's primary goal was to investigate disease-free survival (DFS). However, the study's final results did not show an improved DFS in the MAGE-A3 treated compared to the placebo control group (60.5 vs. 57.9 months, respectively) [ 54 ].

Similarly, NY-ESO-1, another CTA candidate, is expressed approximately in 30% of lung cancer specimens [ 55 ]. Many of its beneficial roles include a prognostic and a predictive factor for adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy treatment efficacy in NSCLC, and the capacity to induce specific antibodies in serum along with activation of the helper CD4 + and cytotoxic CD8 + T cells have already been demonstrated [ 56 , 57 ]. Two concurrent phase I trials are at present recruiting patients to assess the safety and the immune response of ID-LV305 (immunotherapy targeting DCs in individuals with advanced cancer with the tumor cells expressing the NY-ESO-1 protein, NCT02122861 ) and of IDC-G305 (a new vaccine candidate containing recombinant NY-ESO-1 antigen and GLA-SE as an adjuvant, NCT02015416 ) in patients with NSCLC along with few other types of cancer patients. Another antigen expressed on NSCLC tumors is the mucin 1 (MUC-1) glycoprotein, which stimulates tumor cell proliferation pathologically via its cell surface receptor interaction [ 58 ]. It was chosen as a target for the development of the synthetic lipopeptide-based vaccine Tecemotide (L-BLP25), which was proved to be immunogenic and well-tolerated in a phase I study and was demonstrated as maintenance therapy for stage IIB-IV NSCLC patients through the achievement of stable disease or objective response, reported after the first-line chemotherapy in another phase IIB trial. In the phase III START trial, the treatment group showed no change in OS compared to the placebo-controlled groups (MS was 25.6 months vs. 22.3 months) [ 59 – 61 ]. Later, several studies, including the phase III START2 and INSPIRE trials were undertaken, but they were terminated owing to negative findings from the phase I/II Japanese EMR 63,325–009 study in unresectable stage III NSCLC patients. Use of pattern recognition receptor (PRR) activators and supramolecular peptide conjugates may enhance the potency of peptide vaccines. Hence further research is necessary to enhance the efficacy of peptide vaccines. Currently, personalized peptide-based vaccinations are being investigated for efficient therapeutic output.

DNA vaccines

DNA vaccines involve the insertion of a plasmid containing a particular DNA sequence encoding the target antigen to elicit specific immune responses in the presence of the antigen in situ. This approach is cost-effective and can be repeatedly administered. Another advantage is that the antigen post-expression can be presented by MHC class I and II, triggering CD4 and CD8 T cells and humoral immunity. While cytosolic sensors can recognize double-stranded plasmid DNA, which stimulates the innate immune response. Using a genetically engineered bi-transgenic Kras G12D inducible mouse (TetO-Kras4bG12D/Scgb1a1-rtTA) lung cancer model, Weng et al. used the Kras DNA vaccination. Vaccination yielded an efficient antitumor response and effectively targeted Kras-driven lung tumors [ 62 ]. MAGE-A3 protein (recMAGE-A3) vaccination has been used to target MAGE-A3, expressed in melanoma and NSCLC. Though effective in mouse melanoma models, when administered with or without adjuvant as a part of the large randomized MAGRIT MAGE-A3-positive NSCLC phase III trial demonstrated no advantage over the placebo [ 63 ]. DNA vaccines work in animal models but did not show promising results in clinical studies, necessitating the exploration of novel strategies. A comparison of xenogeneic antigens, neoantigens, and TAA in relation to therapeutic efficacy needs to be determined. Future research needs to investigate combination therapy approaches potentiate (targeted at activating antigen response and immunosuppression) to mediate synergistic and sustained immunogenic response in lung cancer. Another key area to investigate is the application of DNA vaccines in oncogenic virus-induced/activated cancers, including lung cancer. Advances in ex vivo DCs pulsing, nanotechnology, and surface functionalization approaches can help increase the efficacy of DNA vaccines. Considerations of immunodominance versus tolerance of immunogenic epitopes, poly-specific and poly-functional DNA vaccine, combination TAAs and neoantigens in a vaccine may boost vaccination-associated immunogenicity [ 64 ].

Vector vaccines

Vector-based vaccines are the constructs developed by manipulating specialized bacteria, viruses, yeast, or other structures to express any recombinant antigen. The TG4010 is a viral vector vaccine comprising a modified Vaccinia Virus Ankara (MVA) that encodes the human MUC1 and interleukin 2 [ 65 ]. Rochlitz et al . 2003, reported a good safety profile in a phase I clinical trial, where 13 patients having different solid tumors including lung cancer, were subjected to increasing doses of TG4010. Among them, one lung cancer patient showed a considerable reduction in the extent of metastasis over 14 months [ 66 ]. A phase II randomized clinical trial consisting of stages IIIB and IV NSCLC patients potentially pointed towards using TG4010 in combination with chemotherapy in first-line advanced or metastatic NSCLC for better chemotherapy results. [ 67 ]. The patients were administered the TG4010 in combination with the first-line chemotherapy (Cisplatin plus Vinorelbine doublet) or received the vaccine alone, and 29.5% of the patients who received treatment in the combination arm had a radiological response. A phase II trial ( NCT00793208 ) that combines TG4010 with Nivolumab is ongoing [ 68 ]. Apart from this, other adenovirus vaccines expressing melanoma-associated antigen 3 (MAGE-A3) and MG1 maraba oncolytic virus (MG1-MAGEA3) were tested in phase I/II dose-escalation trial ( NCT02879760 ) testing the combinatorial efficacy of the vaccine with Pembrolizumab, is presently recruiting NSCLC patients who have shown signs of radiological progression with at least one cycle of platinum-doublet chemotherapy [ 69 ]. The MAGE-A3, alone and in combination with MG1-MAGEA3 was tested in solid tumors, including lung cancer ( NCT02285816 ) [ 69 ]. A better understanding of the molecular mechanism may enhance the efficacy of vector-based vaccines.

Dendritic cell vaccines

Cell-based immunotherapy helps immune cells identify tumor antigens and target cancer cells. This potential therapeutic immunotherapy technique is mainly explored in the context of dendritic cell-based vaccines, as DC therapy is safe and can elicit robust antigen-specific T cell responses owing to their antigen-presenting abilities [ 44 ]. Since the FDA authorization of Sipuleucel-T in April 2010 to treat metastatic prostate cancer, DC vaccines have progressed significantly, and several clinical trials are ongoing. A promising approach is the intra-tumoral delivery of autologous DC vaccine (CCL21 gene-modified DCs or AdCCL21-DC) targeting lung cancer. Lee et al. reported significant activation of CD8 + T cell tumor infiltration and antigen-specific immune response while using AdCCL21-DC in phase I clinical trial on stage IIIB, stage IV, or recurrent NSCLC ( NCT00601094 ) [ 70 ]. Following the exciting results, another follow-up phase I trial is underway to evaluate the efficiency of pembrolizumab and AdCCL21-DC in combination on advanced-stage NSCLC patients ( NCT03546361 ). The mechanistic effect of intratumoral CCL21-DC combined with anti-PD-1 therapy was further evaluated on murine NSCLC models [ 71 ]. Abascal et al. recently used murine CD103 + cDC1 (conventional DC type I) cells to produce soluble FLT3L (FLT3L cDC1) and conducted in situ vaccination experiments on anti-PD1 resistant murine NSCLC models and reported enhanced anti-tumor efficacy compared to non-modified cDC1 cells. Emerging research suggests DC vaccination may increase patient survival, calling for developing next-generation DC vaccines and testing new DC vaccine-immunotherapy combinations [ 71 ]. Nevertheless, the unique biology and classification of DCs, immune tolerance, weak and limited lifespan hamper their persistent and effective cancer immunity, and the production process are challenges that need to be addressed [ 72 ]. The role of different types of DCs (Mo-DC, cDC1, cDC2, pDC) and DC-derived exosomes in the context of the DC vaccine development may be further evaluated.

Allogeneic vaccines

Allogeneic vaccines contain non-self-cancer cells as the antigen source. Cancer cells of one patient are harvested and administered in another patient with the same tumor type, post necessary modifications and processing [ 73 ]. One such vaccine is the Belagenpumatucel-L. It is prepared by transfecting four radiated allogeneic NSCLC cell lines (H460, RH2, SKLU-1, H520, of which 2 are LUAD, one LUSC, and one LCC cell line) with a plasmid bearing the antisense of transforming growth factor β2 (TGF-β2) [ 74 ]. High levels of TGF-β have been correlated to immune suppression and worsening prognosis in NSCLC patients [ 75 ]. Inclusion of the antisense transgene in this vaccine inhibits TGF-β2 intending to increase immunogenicity. To assess its efficacy, a phase III randomized controlled trial (STOP), with 532 stage III/IV NSCLC patients who had no disease progression after a first line of platinum-based chemotherapy, was conducted that compared Belagenpumatucel-L with placebo. However, the study did not satisfy the primary endpoint as no difference in MS was observed between the vaccinated and the placebo arms (20.3 months vs. 17.8 months respectively, HR 0.94, P = 0.594). Similarly, another vaccine candidate comprising of autologous or allogeneic NSCLC cells plus GM.CD40L expressing K562 cells, when studied through phase I and II trials, could yield no affirmative results in terms of MS in NSCLC patients. Currently, two other allogeneic vaccines the Tergenpumatucel-L ( NCT02460367 , with 16 participants in a phase Ib/2 trial) and Viagenpumatucel-L ( NCT02439450 , with 121 participants in a phase Ib/2 DURGA trial), are being investigated in combination with ICIs. The major challenges of monotherapy include intratumoral heterogeneity, allogeneic vaccine-induced mutational divergence, and tumor escape, vaccines developed from cell lines/cellular components (non-self) may not reflect actual tumor antigens and tumor/ TME-induced immunosuppression. Hence better transcriptome analysis for antigen selection, including neoantigens, tackling immunosuppression, and combining T cell-based immunotherapies may become clinically translatable. Various clinical studies are underway on various solid tumors, and any success strategies may be expanded to lung cancer therapy.

Adoptive cell therapy

Adoptive cell therapy (ACT) utilizes tumor-reactive immune cells from patients, especially different types of T cells, that are grown and genetically engineered ex vivo before being re-administered to the patient as a therapy to identify and target cancer cells. In this regard, the most commonly used are Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-modified T cells (CAR T) therapy, Tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy, engineered T-cell receptor (TCR)-therapy, and Natural killer (NK) cell therapy [ 76 ]. Among these, the CAR-T cells and TCRs are both genetically modified synthetic biology approaches to target particular tumor antigens and exhibit prominent therapeutic effects [ 77 , 78 ] (Fig. 3 B). CAR-T cell immunotherapy has an 80–90% remission rate in hematological malignancies, and FDA has authorized CD19-targeting CAR-T for treating hematological cancers. This recent success with CAR-T therapy has changed the landscape of cancer therapy and spurred research efforts to translate these curative benefits to solid tumors like lung cancer [ 79 ].

CAR T cell therapy and lung cancer targeting

CAR-T cells are created genetically engineering autologous or allogeneic T cells in vitro by modifying T-cell receptors to identify and bind to antigens on cancer cells. Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) are synthetic designed receptors, retrovirally transduced into T cells, and consists of three domains (Fig. 2 , 3 ). CAR primarily consists of an extracellular antigen recognition domain (ectodomain), a transmembrane domain, and an intracellular signal transduction domain (endodomain). The ectodomain that determines the CAR’s affinity comprises an antibody-derived single-chain variable fragment (scFv) composed of the antigen-binding zone, including both the heavy and light chains of a monoclonal antibody (Fig. 4 ) [ 80 ]. On the one hand, the transmembrane domains connect the ectodomain via a hinge; on the other hand connect the endodomain, thereby anchoring the CAR to the cell. Fig. 4 Schematic representation of CAR architectural design. A : Evolution of CAR design through generations. B . Armored CAR T-cell design and functional mechanism. C . Schematic enumerates various building components that correlate to different CAR segments that may be exploited as CAR construction components. Gen: Generation; scFv: single-chain variable fragment; AD: activation domain; Co-S1: Co-stimulatory domain 1; Co-S2: Co-stimulatory domain 2; VL: variable light; VH: variable heavy; TRUCK: T-cells Redirected towards Universal Cytokine Killing. BiTEs: Bispecific T-cell engager

membrane. The CAR's intracellular domain has an activation domain (AD) and one or two co-stimulatory domains (Co-S1, 2) and can modulate the length, flexibility, surface density, downstream signal, and aggregation potential of CAR and thereby CAR-T functions (Fig. 4 ) [ 80 , 81 ]. The activation domain is often associated with costimulatory molecules, which activate T cell activity and contribute to T cell proliferation and longevity. Phosphorylation of the immunoreceptor tyrosine-based activation motifs (ITAMs) of CAR endodomains activate and costimulate T lymphocytes. CAR structure evolution has seen several generations with hierarchical assimilation of functional modules (Fig. 4 A) [ 82 ]. While the first-generation CAR lacked a costimulatory domain, the second and third-generation CAR adapted one and two costimulatory domains, respectively. Fourth-generation CAR-Ts combine the direct tumoricidal activity of CAR-Ts and the ability to overcome the immune-modulating ability of the tumor microenvironment without the systemic side effects (Fig. 4 A).

CAR-T cells of this generation, called armored CAR T-cells, express proteins to minimize immunosuppression and increase anti-tumor activity (Fig. 4 B) [ 83 ]. These CAR modifications can be summarized as follows, T-cells Redirected towards Universal Cytokine Killing) TRUCK, cytokine modulating CAR, and antibody modulating CAR. TRUCK CAR secretes cytokines to interfere with the immunosuppressive properties of solid tumors. By putting brakes on the immune-suppressive cytokine environment, it may be possible to enhance CAR T-cell and resident immune cell antitumor potential [ 80 ]. Cytokine modulation CARs depend on engineering CARs to express specific receptors, and ligands can help regulate CAR T-cells reaction to cytokines and may also affect cytokine function (Fig. 4 B). To specifically target cancer antigens, CARs can be engineered to produce antibody-like proteins, called antibody modulating CARs. Another popular CAR design aspect is a nanobody or VHH antibody, composed of a single antibody's variable heavy chain or heavy chain-only antibodies (HcAbs) [ 84 ]. These armored CAR T-cells may boost solid tumor targeting efficacy due to their high affinity towards antigen, compactness, optimal stability, and manufacturability [ 85 ]. Bispecific T-cell engagers (BiTEs) are examples of innovative CAR design, where adaptive therapeutic benefit is achieved by a conjunction of two scFvs with differing antigenic specificities [ 86 ]. BiTEs are designed to bind to proteins on T cells and proteins on tumor cells, bringing them spatially closer, establishing an immune synapse, and unleashing immune cell killing (Fig. 4 ). Figure 4 C lists several components that may be utilized as construction blocks corresponding to various CAR segments. CAR T treatment confronts various challenges when targeting solid tumors. However, increased attempts are being undertaken to target lung cancer in light of developments in synthetic biology, creative CAR design, and effectiveness against blood cancer [ 82 ].

Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is strongly expressed in lung cancer compared to healthy cells, and high CEA expression is related to poor prognosis and metastasis. Therefore, anti-CEA CAR-T cell therapy and its safety efficacy are evaluated on CEA-positive lung cancer patients ( NCT02349724 , NCT04348643 ). Like CEA, Mucin 1 (MUC1) is also highly expressed in lung cancer, promotes metastasis, and is thus an exciting target for ACT against lung cancer [ 87 , 88 ]. CAR-T cells targeting MUC1 successfully eliminate NSCLC tumor cells [ 88 ] and are evaluated in clinical trials for lung cancer ( NCT03525782 , NCT02587689 , and NCT05239143 ). A third-generation anti-PSCA/MUC1/TGFβ/HER2/Mesothelin/Lewis-Y/GPC3/AXL/EGFR/B7-H3/Claudin18.2-CAR-T has been evaluated in an interventional Phase I trial ( NCT03198052 ). Another interesting target is the cluster of differentiation 276 (CD276). CD276 is a new cancer diagnostic marker and an indicator of immunological status and prognosis that correlates favorably with the NSCLC tumor stage [ 89 ]. The silencing of CD276 modulates integrin signaling to ameliorate lung cancer metastatic potential [ 90 ]. Anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 antibodies have radically improved NSCLC therapy with significantly increased ORR and PFS but suffers from multiple challenges. Recently PD-L1-targeting CAR T cells have been found effective in xenograft NSCLC tumors with high or low PD-L1 expression [ 91 , 92 ]. MSLN-CAR T cells secreting PD-1 nanobody is being explored in an interventional phase I trial for NSCLC ( NCT04489862 ). Immune infiltration in a tumor is a significant hurdle in effective ACT therapy. NSCLC tumors produce substantial amounts of the chemokine CXCL13, and an intelligent design would be to express its single receptor CXCR5 on the CAR T cells for enhanced CAR T cell tumor infiltration and heightened efficiency. An exploratory study of anti-EGFR CAR T cells modified by CXCR 5 is under phase I trials in NSCLC ( NCT05060796 ) [ 93 ]. A third/fourth generation GPC3-CAR-T cell was engineered to target Glypican-3, a cell membrane proteoglycan and a potential marker specifically for LUSC and also for LUAD [ 94 ]. The GPC3-CAR was also engineered to express TGFβ targeting CAR (GPC3/TGF-CART), is effective in in vitro and in vivo experiments, and is under a phase I interventional investigation for LUSC ( NCT03198546 ). TGFβ-CAR T cells can reduce the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment making it more conducive for T cell activation [ 95 ]. A recent study examined PD-L1-targeting CAR T cells in PD-L1 high and low xenograft NSCLC tumors. PD-L1-CAR T cells exhibited robust effector T cell function and destroyed PD-L1 high and PD-L1 low tumors. Local irradiation improved PD-L1-CAR T cell efficacy and can be an innovative and effective strategy against PD-L1 low NSCLC patients [ 96 ]. Some exciting target antigens used for generating CAR against lung cancer include MUC-1, CEA, MSLN, HER2, GPC3, ROR1, and EGFR [ 97 ]. Although lung cancer CAR T immunotherapy is in its infancy, several challenges must be overcome before it can usher in widespread clinical implementation [ 98 ].

Developing an ACT for targeting lung cancer presents a big challenge. However, selecting the ideal TSA or TAA with minimal expression in normal tissue, eliminating off-tumor adverse effects and the immune-tolerant state posed by the tumor microenvironment, needs to be considered before developing CAR-T cells and TCRs for targeting NSCLC. Tackling CAR T -associated toxicity, antigen escape, heterogeneity of antigen, reduced CAR T proliferation in the tumor microenvironment, and CAR T tumor infiltration needs innovative synthetic biology approaches. Integrating appropriate modules to sense specific intra- and extracellular signals and actuator modules to coordinate precise transcriptional or translational control will effectively address the current lacunae. The use of multiple CARs on the same or different cell types (e.g., CD4/ CD8/ NK cells) and the ability to spatiotemporally controllable transient CAR activation using switchable CARs (inducible by ultrasound/ light/ drug/ adaptor) can strengthen the development of effective CAR T therapy [ 99 ]. Also, generating CAR-T cells with safety switches with inducible caspase-9 gene may be a successful approach [ 100 – 102 ]. To improve CAR T safety, novel self-driving and self-destruct CAR architecture are being engineered. CAR design, including multiple antigen-targeting abilities, can effectively address heterogeneous antigens in lung tumors [ 78 , 98 ]. Another approach is to generate personalized.

CAR T for specific lung cancer genotypes. The rapid use of artificial intelligence (AI) in data analysis and synthetic biology design using CRISPR [ 103 ] may help scientists design synthetic receptors in order to correlate various chemical recognition events (e.g., SynNotch) [ 104 ]. Some researchers are trying to mass-produce CAR-T “off-the-shelf” cells, and this approach might make their CAR T therapy easier and cheaper. There is a need to identify neoantigens and develop enhanced high throughput screening tools to ensure that all structural components of the CAR T cells are optimized to target lung cancer.

T-cell receptor (TCR) engineering and lung cancer

TCR immunotherapy employs the innate mechanism of T cells to target tumor antigens by genetically modifying T cells ex vivo to express cancer-antigen-specific T cell receptors (TCRs) generated via TCR-engineering of patient-isolated T cells (TCR T) (Fig. 5 ) [ 105 ]. TCR therapy has distinct advantages over CAR T therapy targeting solid tumors like lung cancer [ 77 ]. TCRs identify only specific oncogenic peptides presented by human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class I on the surface of a tumor cell or an APC [ 106 ]. TCR T lymphocytes may target tumor mutation-derived neoantigens in a highly selective and non-toxic way, and a majority of clinical trials are focused on solid tumors. Fig. 5 Schematic showing TIL and TCR T cell therapy. TCR T and TILs are isolated from the patient and multiplied in the laboratory before being reintroduced to the patient

Multiple in vitro and in vivo investigations have shown the anti-cancer efficacy of TCR-T cells engineered to target lung cancer-specific antigens. Recently autologous TCR T-cell therapy against a lung tumor-specific protein called NY-ESO-1 is gaining traction. Letetresgene autoleucel (GSK3377794) is a first generation of TCR T-cells designed to target NY-ESO-1 and showed an objective response in Multiple Myeloma and myxoid/round cell liposarcoma trial ( NCT03168438 , NCT02992743 ). The safety and efficacy of Letetresgene autoleucel were evaluated after infusing back anti-NY-ESO-1 TCR to patients following lymphodepleting chemotherapy in a phase I trial that is now completed ( NCT02588612 ). Other phase I trials using anti-NY-ESO-1 TCR transduced T cells alone or in combination with pembrolizumab on advanced NSCLC patient is underway ( NCT03029273 , NCT03709706 ). Another exciting target for TCR-T cell therapy is Kita-kyushu lung cancer antigen 1 (KK-LC-1), reported to be higher in LUAD than LUSC and exhibited a higher association with higher TMB tumors [ 107 ]. A clinical trial is currently investigating the safety and dosing of TCR Gene therapy targeting KK-LC-1 in KK-LC-1 + lung cancer patients ( NCT05035407 ). TCR-T therapy has made a breakthrough in many tumors; however, there are few safe and effective targets due to possible off-target, dose-limiting cytotoxicity, autoimmune toxicity, and cytokine-related toxicity. Long-term safety evaluation studies with TCR-T cell therapy are also underway for lung and other cancers ( NCT05292859 , NCT05194735 ) and understanding their efficacy concerning somatic mutation and HLA typing ( NCT05124743 ). A recent study used autologous TCR T therapy to target the hot spot KRAS G12D mutation in pancreatic cancer [ 108 ], with significant tumor regression and an overall partial response of 72%. Despite the survival of TCR-transduced T cells in the circulation, a second patient with the identical KRAS mutation and HLA allele did not benefit from T cell infusion, suggesting other potential TCR T failure mechanisms. The KRAS genetic variants are significant in lung cancer, especially in LUAD; the G12D mutation corresponds to ~ 3% of patients [ 109 ], and therefore a similar targeted TCR T therapy can bring a sea change in lung cancer treatment.

Though TCR T cell therapy is compelling, several challenges must be addressed for widespread clinical use [ 105 ]. Deficiencies in the antigen-processing and presentation machinery, downregulation of tumor HLA molecules and target mutations, augmentation of immune-suppressive cytokines, and complimentary activation of pathways (e.g., Wnt) inducing T cell tumor exclusion by the tumor/ TME can lead to attenuation of the TCR T therapy response [ 110 , 111 ]. Moreover, HLA-coding genes are highly variable in the human genome, with about 20,000 alleles complicating TCR T HLA restriction. Unlike CAR T therapy, TCR T therapy TCRs are restricted to commonly found HLA alleles, such as HLA-A*02:01. TCR specificity is encoded by two distinct gene regions (TCR α and β transcripts) [ 112 ]. While doing TCR sequencing, intermixing can create ambiguity over which TCR α sequence corresponds with which TCR β sequence. Therefore, clonal T-cell isolation methods like limiting dilution, single Cell RT-PCR, and Single-Cell RNA Sequencing (scRNAseq) can be used [ 113 ]. Mispair heterodimerization of the TCR constant region of α and β chain of endogenous and engineered TCRs may lead to non-productive TCRs, unexpected autoantigen specificity, competition with engineered TCR, and may cause unwanted graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD). Techniques like murinization (integrating murine-derived TCR), the introduction of an additional disulfide bond (at residue 48 of Cα and residue 57 of Cβ), introducing stabilizing mutations (α-LVL) in α chain, domain swapping (Cα glycine and Cβ arginine), single-chain TCR, and combinations can improve TCR efficacy and safety profile [ 105 ]. Another issue is choosing and pre-clinically testing amongst the multiple antigen-specific TCR sequences discovered. An exciting tool is HLA restriction, where individually cloned HLA in COS7 cells are cocultured with TCR T cells to detect T cell activation. TCR affinity/avidity studies evaluate the association rate, dissociation rate, and binding constant using surface plasmon resonance. Cotransfected CD4 + T cells augment antitumor effects by boosting CD8 + T cell proliferation and survival [ 114 ]. Therefore, more studies with potential synergy with other immunotherapy, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy must be evaluated [ 106 ]. Novel genome engineering techniques, advances in single-cell genomics, and enhanced know-how through TCR T therapy trials may help design more effective TCR T cell therapy in lung cancer.

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) and lung cancer

TILs can naturally recognize and target tumor cells, but the tumor cells usually evade this TIL-based immune response. TILs are often enriched with tumor-antigen specific T cell clones compared to T cells in peripheral blood and hence used for TIL therapy [ 115 ]. This novel immunotherapy approach uses TILs isolated from the patient's tumor and expanded ex vivo using recombinant IL-2 (rIL-2). IL-2 promotes TIL proliferation, activation, and tumor-killing activity [ 116 ]. Prior to TIL therapy, the patient is subjected to non-myeloablative lymphodepletion to eradicate the immune-suppressive TME. Billions of these TILs are then reintroduced in the patient, where they can proliferate, recognize tumor cells, and effectively ablate them (Fig. 5 ). TILs are primarily studied in solid tumors, including lung cancer [ 115 ].

In a similar context, ACT with TILs has been evaluated in NSCLC patients. One of the earlier studies examined the usefulness of TILs as a post-operative therapy for stage II–III NSCLC patients where tissue samples were surgically resected from the primary lung lesions of NSCLC patients [ 117 ]. Isolated lymphocytes and cancer cells were grown in a medium supplemented with rIL-2, and TILs were infused in stage stratified patients and subcutaneous injections of IL-2 daily until the maximum tolerable dosage was reached. The TIL arm had a favorable MS compared to the standard of care treatment arm (22.4 vs. 14.1 months). Recently, according to the results of a small phase I trial, TIL therapy (≥ 20 × 10 9 to 10 10 CD3 + cells) along with IL-2 was found to be a feasible treatment option with a manageable toxicity profile [ 118 ]. It was observed that the TILs expanded in 95% of NSCLC patients with metastasis and had disease progression on Nivolumab (Opdivo). Another group investigated the effect of human double-negative T (DNT) cells (CD3 + CD4-CD8-) in targeting advanced lung cancer in vitro alone or in conjunction with Nivolumab (anti-PD-1 antibody). They observed that both patient- and healthy donor-derived DNT cells, expanded ex vivo, exhibited similar cytotoxicity against lung cancer cells [ 119 ]. It was also noted that DNT cells derived from healthy donors could considerably inhibit the growth of xenografts obtained from advanced-stage lung cancer patients, and the anti-cancer effect was further improved by the anti-PD-1 treatment that influenced augmented tumor infiltration of DNT cells. Autologous TIL therapy was also effective in a phase I trial on metastatic PD-1-resistant lung cancers ( NCT03215810 ) [ 120 ]. However, the widespread application of TIL therapy has been mitigated by the demand for producing sufficient TILs in a stringent time period. Applications of rapid expansion protocols complying with good manufacturing practice conditions have improved the deficit [ 121 ]. Currently, a phase II study ( NCT02133196 , 85 participants) is recruiting patients to revise the utility of using autologous young TILs derived from NSCLC patients in combination with drugs like Aldesleukin, Fludarabine, and Cyclophosphamide. Further clinical trials are anticipated to predict the appositeness of TIL-based ACT in this new era of immunotherapy.

Oncolytic viruses for lung cancer immunotherapy

Oncolytic Viruses (OVs) are genetically modified viruses that can identify, infect, and lyse diverse cell types in a tumor microenvironment, which can halt and often reduce tumor development [ 122 ]. They either possess a natural tropism to the cancer cells or can be genetically manipulated to recognize specific targets displayed by the cells. These targets often comprise of the nuclear transcription factors like human telomerase reverse transcriptase, osteocalcin, cyclooxygenase-2, prostate-specific antigen, or surface markers like folate receptor, prostate-specific membrane antigen, endothelial growth factor receptor, CD20, and HER2/Neu [ 123 ]. Moreover, it is well-known that different evasion mechanisms are in play in the tumor microenvironment that directly or indirectly downregulates the immune response, aiding the disease progression even in immunocompetent patients [ 124 ]. It has been observed that the OVs may stimulate the immune system against the tumor cells, hence affecting the establishment of an anticancer response [ 124 – 126 ]. Therefore, the clinical application of OVs emerges as a viable approach to induce an inflamed state in the tumor microenvironment whereby the immune system can detect and kill the abnormal cells [ 126 , 127 ]. Additionally, the viruses exhibit a variety of pathways that direct the infected cells toward lysis, resulting in tumor cell death and enhancing immunotherapy effectiveness [ 128 ] (Fig. 3 C). Several such genetically modified OVs are currently undergoing investigation for lung cancer to determine their applicability and efficacy in the disease scenario. For example, the cytotoxic effect of oncolytic Herpes Simplex Virus-1 (HSV-1) regulated miRNA145 delivery was tested in vitro in human NSCLC cell lines (A549, H460, H838, and H197), showing therapeutic potential [ 129 , 130 ]. Likewise, it has been proven that Coxsackievirus B3 (CVB3) holds precise oncolytic activities in nine human NSCLC cell lines. Also, it has been observed that intralesional injections of the virus in transplantable lung tumor models led to significant regression. The virus-infected NSCLC cells secreted ATP, abundantly expressed calreticulin on their surface, and translocated extranuclear HMGB-1, which are innate immune response markers that indicate immunogenic cell death (ICD) [ 131 , 132 ]. Similarly, the application of oncolytic vaccinia viruses (OVVs) having three individual genetic backbones has been investigated in preclinical studies [ 133 – 135 ]. Moving onward, the applications of OVs are also under investigation through several completed and ongoing clinical trials. Lysogenic Adenovirus has an extensive tissue tropism, exploited in a two-intervention armed clinical trial ( NCT01574729 ) including 58 patients, was conducted to evaluate an oncolytic Adenovirus (rAd-p53) mediated wild-type p53 gene transfer in stage III or IV NSCLC patients [ 136 , 137 ]. 33% of patients in the experiment received a combination of rAd-p53 injection (through intratumoral or bronchial artery access) and chemotherapy instillation via the bronchial artery, while the rest (control group) received only the chemotherapy treatment. It was observed that the combinatorial treatment group showcased an extended disease progression than the control group (MS, 7.75 vs. 5.5 months; P = 0.018) of patients. Two patients with stage III NSCLC who received the combination treatment showed a complete response.

Similarly, much earlier in 2007, the potential of Seneca Valley Virus isolate 001 (SVV-001, now NTX-010) as an OV came to the forefront [ 138 ]. Additionally, it was reported that even the maximum viral dosage was well tolerated in SCLC and other malignancies, with predictable viral clearance kinetics and intra-tumoral viral replication [ 139 ]. However, data obtained from a recently published randomized placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase II clinical trial ( NCT01017601 ) involving 50 patients with advanced-stage SCLC without advance of disease after platinum-based chemotherapy treatment suggests that the first-generation SVV-001 OV as a single agent may be incapable of generating desired clinical efficacy in the patients [ 140 ]. OV therapy faces multiple challenges, including ECM-based barrier to viral spread and tumor penetration leading to inadequate tumor trophism, passive targeting, previous immunization-associated anti-viral immune response, and tumor hypoxia inhibiting viral replication and functions. Different viral engineering approaches can help address some of the challenges, including using RGD-motifs, scFv fusion with capsid protein, bi-specific adaptors, capsid modification, stealthing, use of hypoxia-responsive promoters, novel theranostic modalities, and considering different serotypes. Other ongoing and completed clinical trials estimating the applicability of OVs in lung cancer are listed in Table 1 . Table 1 Completed and current clinical trials evaluating the applicability of Oncolytic Viruses in lung cancer Clinical Trial ID Oncolytic virus Virus type Transgene/ Target Combination Cancer Status Duration Sponsor/ Agency NCT 02,879,760 Ad-MAGEA3 with MG1-MAGEA3 Adenovirus vector Maraba virus Melanoma associated antigen 3 Pembrolizumab NSCLC Phase I / II 2017–2020 Turnstone Biologics, Corp NCT 02,043,665 CVA21 Coxsackie virus None (CAVATAK) Pembrolizumab NSCLC Phase I 2013–2020 Viralytics NCT 03,647,163 VSV-IFNβ-NIS Vesicular Stomatitis virus (VSV) Interferon-beta (IFNβ) and the sodium iodide symporter (NIS) Pembrolizumab NSCLC Phase I / II 2019–2021 Vyriad, Inc NCT 00,861,627 REOLYSIN Reovirus Serotype 3—Dearing Strain KRAS/EGFR Carboplatin Paclitaxel NSCLC Phase II 2009–2015 Oncolytics Biotech NCT 01,708,993 REOLYSIN Reovirus Serotype 3—Dearing Strain KRAS/EGFR Pemetrexed Docetaxel NSCLC Phase II 2012–2016 Canadian Cancer Trials Group NCT 01,017,601 (NTX-010) Seneca Valley virus-001 Seneca virus NA NA SCLC Phase II 2010–2013 Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology NCT 01,574,729 rAd-p53 Adenovirus p53 surgery NSCLC Phase II 2012–2015 Shenzhen SiBiono GeneTech Co.,Ltd NCT 03,004,183 ADV/HSV-tk Herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase SBRT Pembrolizumab NSCLC Phase II 2017–2022 The Methodist Hospital Research Institute NCT 02,831,933 ADV/HSV-tk Herpes simplex virus thymidine kinase SBRT Nivolumab NSCLC Phase II 2017–2020 Eric Bernicker, MD

Targeted antibodies for lung cancer

Scientists have well exploited the capability of the antibodies to specifically target tumor antigens on cancer cells and created a plethora of targeted antibodies to impair tumor cell activities. They can be broadly classified into three categories: (i) mAbs, (ii) antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) (iii) bispecific antibodies (Fig. 3 D). A few mAbs that received FDA approval for the treatment of NSCLC in the preceding two decades are—Cetuximab, Bevacizumab, Nivolumab, and Pembrolizumab (Table 2 ). Cetuximab is an anti-EGFR mAb that shows specific binding to the extracellular domain of EGFR and disrupts its receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK)-associated downstream proliferative activity. It has furnished positive responses in various combination therapy. Other efficacious anti-EGFR mAbs under evaluation in NSCLC are Necitumumab, Nimotuzumab, and Ficlatuzumab [ 141 – 144 ]. An anti-VEGF mAb Bevacizumab that showed anti-angiogenic potential to inhibit tumor growth was the first to receive FDA approval and is discussed in other sections. Another approved anti-VEGF mAb is ramucirumab which showed significant promise in combination therapy for NSCLC [ 145 ]. Table 2 Targeted antibodies for lung cancer therapy Targeted Antibodies Lung cancer type Related Molecule Target / Bioactivity Monoclonal Antibodies (MABs) NSCLC Cetuximab Anti-EGFR Necitumumab Anti-EGFR Nimotuzumab Anti-EGFR Ficlatuzumab Anti-EGFR Bevacizumab Anti-VEGF Ramucirumab Anti-VEGF/VEGFR2 Nivolumab Anti-PD-1 Pembrolizumab Anti-PD-1 Ipilimumab Anti-CTLA-4 Tremelimumab Anti-CTLA-4 Denosumab Anti-RANKL Figitumumab Anti-IGF-1R SCLC Tarextumab Anti-Notch2 / Notch3 Tucotuzumab Anti-EpCAM Bec2 Anti-GD3 Antibody–Drug Conjugate (ADC) SCLC Rovalpituzumab tesirine Anti-DLL3 Sacituzumab govitecan Anti-Trop-2 Lorvotuzumab mertansine Anti-CD56 NSCLC Ado-Trastuzumab emtansine Anti-HER2 Telisotuzumab vedotin Anti-cMET Enapotamab vedotin Anti-AXL Bispecific antibodies NSCLC Amivantamab Anti-EGFR, Anti-MET

Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-based targeting antibodies prevent tumor cells from being attacked by immune system components ready to combat them. Among them, Nivolumab and Pembrolizumab are anti-PD-1 mAbs currently used in clinics. Also, two other anti-CTLA-4 mAbs undergoing rigorous evaluation are Ipilimumab and Tremelimumab. Their anticancer activities are elaborately discussed in other sections. Denosumab, an anti-RANKL (receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand) mAb, showed efficacy in metastatic lung cancer inhibition in a phase III study [ 146 ]. Phase I and II study with Figitumumab, a fully humanized anti-IGF-1R MAB, as first-line therapy combined with chemotherapy showed considerable promise, but a phase III trial was discontinued [ 147 ]. For SCLC, efforts have also been directed to develop mAbs such as Tarextumab (anti-Notch 2 / Notch 3), Tucotuzumab (anti-EpCAM), and Bec2 (anti-GD3), which furnished positive outcomes in various clinical trials [ 148 – 150 ]. Nonetheless, to further enhance the efficacies of the mAbs, tripartite ADC has been synthesized where a potent cytotoxin is conjugated to mAbs via a covalent linker. Few of them are already commercialized, and many are undergoing different phases of clinical trials [ 151 ]. For refractory and metastatic SCLC, ADCs such as Rovalpituzumab tesirine (anti-DLL3), Sacituzumab govitecan (anti-Trop-2), lorvotuzumab mertansine (anti-CD56) is undergoing phase I/II clinical trials and are showing encouraging results [ 152 – 154 ]. Recent studies did not find an apparent efficacy with Rovalpituzumab tesirine in SCLC patient trials [ 155 ]. For NSCLC, various ADCs such as Ado-trastuzumab emtansine (anti-HER2), Telisotuzumab vedotin (anti-cMET), Enapotamab vedotin (anti-AXL) are under development and showing promising outcomes [ 156 – 158 ]. The third category of antibody-based targeted cancer therapy, referred to as bispecific T cell engagers or bispecific antibodies (BiTEs), are developed by fusing two front-end regions of two antibodies. One of its categories, Amivantamab (anti-EGFR, anti-MET), is now approved for lung cancer treatment [ 159 ]. Considering the clinical evidence accumulated in recent times, we envisage that many of the targeted antibodies will be approved in the near future.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and NSCLC

Inhibition of immune-checkpoint proteins by blocking the CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1 has been the most successful immunotherapeutic strategy in NSCLC. Ipilimumab is a fully-humanized mAb capable of neutralizing the CTLA-4, thus enabling CTL activity and sustaining immune responses mostly by depletion of regulatory T cells (Tregs) that demonstrate high levels of CTLA-4 expression [ 160 ]. Lynch et al. demonstrated in a preliminary phase II study (CA184-041) that Ipilimumab, in combination with chemotherapy in the first-line treatment for metastatic stage IIIB/IV NSCLC showed an enhancement in immune-related progression-free survival (irPFS) compared to only chemotherapy, without significant added toxicities [ 161 , 162 ]. Its combinatorial application with erlotinib, crizotinib, and nivolumab has also been studied in a phase Ib non-randomized clinical trial ( NCT01998126 ) for EGFR and ALK translocation-positive stage IV NSCLC that was completed in 2018 [ 163 ]. MS was not reached, and an excessive toxicity profile led to the termination of the study. Few more studies that combine Ipilimumab with radiation ( NCT02239900 , phase I/II, randomized, 143 participants and NCT02221739 , phase I/II, 39 participants) and PD-1 antibody (discussed underneath) are currently ongoing. Tremelimumab is a fully human mAb that explicitly targets human anti-CTLA4. After it recorded an initial failure in a phase II randomized trial ( n = 87) when administered in patients with pre-treated advanced-stage NSCLC, recently it came forth from the phase III NEPTUNE trial ( NCT02542293 , phase III, randomized, 953 participants) that a combination of Tremelimumab plus Imfinzi (Durvalumab, anti-PD-L1 antibody) performed no better than standard chemotherapy at extending the survival of people with metastatic NSCLC [ 164 ].

On the contrary, antibodies targeting the PD-1 protein have shown greater therapeutic promise in NSCLC. While CTLA-4 pathway inhibitors increase the infiltration and repertoire of tumor-specific T cells, PD-L1/PD-1 inhibitors work by preventing the inhibition of T-cell functions. Nivolumab (brand name Opdivo) is a fully human anti-PD-1 IgG4 mAb that specifically targets the human PD-1 protein. Preliminary data obtained from a phase I clinical trial ( NCT00730639 , non-randomized, 395 participants) of Nivolumab was used in advanced or recurrent malignant patients, including NSCLC, spearheaded three key trials that presented their results in 2015 [ 165 – 167 ]. The phase II, single-arm CheckMate 063 trial ( NCT01721759 , 117 participants with advanced, refractory squamous NSCLC) demonstrated that intravenous administration of Nivolumab (3 mg/kg) every two weeks resulted in 14.5% (17 of 117) patients achieving an objective response (OR), the primary endpoint for the investigation while 26% of (30 of 117) patients showed stable disease [ 165 ]. 17% of patients were reported to have developed grade 3/4 adverse events (AE), the most frequent of which were: pneumonitis (3%), diarrhea (3%), and fatigue (4%). CheckMate 057 ( NCT01673867 , randomized, phase III study, 272 participants) evaluated Nivolumab's effectiveness and safety in patients with disease progression during or after first-line chemotherapy for patients with advanced squamous NSCLC and was compared to docetaxel [ 167 ]. Although the MS for Nivolumab was higher than with docetaxel (9.2 vs. 6.0 months), but PD-L1 expression was of neither predictive nor prognostic benefit. The phase III CheckMate 017 trial ( NCT01642004 , open-label, 352 participants) investigated the effect of Nivolumab (at 3 mg/kg every two weeks) as compared to docetaxel (at 75 mg/m 2 every three weeks) in patients with IIIB/IV non-squamous NSCLC that advanced during or after first-line chemotherapy [ 166 ]. The MS in the Nivolumab group was 12.2 months, compared to 9.4 months in the docetaxel group. Nivolumab did not have the edge over docetaxel in terms of PFS; the study is ongoing. However, Nivolumab revealed a better efficacy than docetaxel across all categories determined by the degree of PD-L1 expression on the tumor cell membrane. Also, treatment-related severe AEs were observed in 10% of the patients treated with Nivolumab, against 54% with docetaxel. The FDA approved Nivolumab as the first anti-PD-1 drug to treat pre-treated advanced or metastatic NSCLC. The scheme of immunotherapy treatment in NSCLC patients is shown in Fig. 3 .

Moreover, additional clinical trials like CheckMate 012 are currently underway to assess the efficacy of Nivolumab with or without Ipilimumab in first-line settings for advanced NSCLC. In the CheckMate 012 trial ( NCT01454102 , phase I, open-label, 472 participants to date), Nivolumab was initially tested as a monotherapy in first-line advanced stage IIIB/IV NSCLC, which resulted in a 23% (12 out of 52) ORR in newly diagnosed advanced NSCLC patients and the investigators found four patients with continuing complete responses [ 168 ]. The ORR was 28% (9 out of 32) in subjects with tumors expressing PD-L1 and 14% (2 of 14) in subjects with no detectable PD-L1 expression. Later, when tested in combination with Ipilimumab or another platinum-based chemotherapy cohort ( n = 56), the trial showed a significant rate (45%) of AEs for which treatment discontinuation occurred in significant numbers [ 165 ]. ORR was achieved regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression and the respective ORRs were 33%, 47%, 47%, and 43% for Nivolumab (10 mg/kg) with gemcitabine/cisplatin, Nivolumab (10 mg/kg) along with pemetrexed/cisplatin, Nivolumab (10 mg/kg) in combination with paclitaxel/carboplatin, and Nivolumab (5 mg/kg) plus paclitaxel/carboplatin in this study. CheckMate 277 trial ( NCT02477826 , randomized, open-label, phase III, 2748 participants) evaluated Nivolumab or Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab, or Nivolumab in combination with platinum-doublet chemotherapy to platinum doublet chemotherapy in PD-L1-defined previously untreated NSCLC [ 169 ]. The results exhibited positive outcomes regarding OS with nivolumab plus ipilimumab compared to chemotherapy in patients irrespective of the expression of PD-L1 [ 170 ]. CheckMate 9LA presented an interesting improvement in the OS for advanced NSCLC patients with two cycles of chemotherapy in combination with Nivolumab and Ipilimumab [ 170 , 171 ]. CheckMate 227 and CheckMate 9LA prompted a chemo-free doublet immunotherapy approach and improved the overall OS regardless of the patient’s PD-L1 profile.

Pembrolizumab (MK-3475) is another high-affinity humanized IgG4 mAb that targets the PD-1 protein. The drug's safety profile and therapeutic efficacy in NSCLC were initially assessed in the phase I clinical KEYNOTE-001 study ( NCT01295827 , phase I, randomized, open-label, 1260 participants), which demonstrated durable antitumor activity in advanced-stage NSCLC patients [ 172 , 173 ]. Patients received Pembrolizumab at either 2 mg/kg ( n = 55) or 10 mg/kg ( n = 238) every 3 weeks or 10 mg/kg ( n = 156) every 2 weeks and response was evaluated every 9 weeks. ORRs for the doses were 15% [95% CI, 7%-28%] at 2 mg/kg every three weeks, 25% (95% CI,18%-33%) at 10 mg/kg every three weeks, and 21% (95% CI,14%-30%) at 10 mg/kg every two weeks respectively, which suggest the use of a 2 mg/kg Pembrolizumab every three weeks as the optimum dosage in patients with previously treated, advanced NSCLC. Subsequently, KEYNOTE-010 ( NCT01905657 , randomized, phase II/III study, 1034 participants) compared the dosage gradient of Pembrolizumab with a fixed dose of docetaxel in patients who were pre-treated with advanced NSCLC (expressing PD-L1 ≥ 1%), keeping OS and PFS as the primary endpoints. Although the MS was considerably extended for Pembrolizumab 2 mg/kg as compared to docetaxel [HR 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58–0.88] and for Pembrolizumab 10 mg/kg when compared to docetaxel (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.49–0.75), no statistically significant variance in the overall median PFS was observed. Notably, PFS was significantly longer with Pembrolizumab in patients whose tumor cells express at least 50% PD-L1. Following the results, the FDA approved Pembrolizumab to treat patients with advanced PD-L1 expressing NSCLC whose disease had worsened following chemotherapy in October 2015. Again, in the phase III KEYNOTE-024 trial ( NCT02142738 ) that assessed the effectiveness of Pembrolizumab as first-line therapy compared to different chemotherapy regimens for metastatic treatment-naive NSCLC, the drug once again proved its advantage over only chemotherapy with significantly longer PFS (10.3 vs. 6.0 months; HR 0.50; P < 0.001) and OS (HR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.89; P = 0.005) in patients receiving the drug. Moreover, the Pembrolizumab group showed a response rate of 44.8% versus 27.8% in the chemotherapy-treated group, and severe AEs were reported to occur in ~ 26.6% of the Pembrolizumab group patients versus 56.6% of the patients in the chemotherapy-treated group. This led to the FDA approval of the drug for the first-line treatment of advanced metastatic NSCLC patients with high tumor PD-L1 expression (at least 50% tumor cells) [ 174 ].

The third group of check-point inhibitors target PD-L1 to inhibit the molecular interaction between PD-L1 and PD-1 or the molecular contact between PD-L1 and B7.1 (a T cell-specific inhibitory receptor). Durvalumab, Atezolizumab, and Avelumab are three fully-humanized anti-IgG1 mAbs that comprise this class of drugs. Durvalumab (MEDI-4736) was tested by a phase I/II trial in stage IIIB/IV NSCLC and other solid tumors. Durvalumab (10 mg/kg) was administered every two weeks for up to one year to treatment-naïve advanced NSCLC patients. The ORR was 25%, and the disease control rate was 56% with ≥ 12 weeks of follow-up, and grade ≥ 3 drug-related AEs (most frequent being diarrhea) were reported in 9% of patients [ 175 ]. Taking forward these encouraging outcomes, the efficacy of Durvalumab is being evaluated in trials for various aspects such as monotherapy ( NCT02087423 ) after concurrent chemo-radiotherapy in stage III NSCLC ( NCT02125461 ) also adjuvant therapy in patients with stage IB to IIIA NSCLC (BR31 trial; NCT02273375 ).

Again, a combinatorial study with Durvalumab and Tremelimumab was initiated to evaluate the postulate stating that co-inhibition of PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 may evoke synergy in immunotherapy in patients with advanced NSCLC [ 176 ]. The outcome demonstrated that 36% of patients developed AEs, and 23% of patients achieved ORR in a combined Tremelimumab 1 mg/kg cohort. Many phase II/III trials, including third-line ARCTIC ( NCT02352948 ), the first-line MYSTIC ( NCT02453282 ), and NEPTUNE ( NCT02542293 ), have been commenced using a combination strategy of immuno-therapeutics. In the case of Atezolizumab (MPDL3280A), after a phase I study confirmed its efficacy for treatment in NSCLC (ORR of 23%, n = 53), especially in patients with tumor cell PD-L1 expression, a single-arm phase II study (BIRCH, NCT02031458 , open-label, 667 participants) in PD-L1 selected (tumors or immune cells in TME) advanced NSCLC was initiated with ORR being the primary endpoint [ 177 , 178 ]. The patients received Atezolizumab (1,200 mg) intravenously every three weeks and were distributed into three cohorts: first-line (cohort 1, with no prior chemotherapy; n = 139); second line (cohort 2, with one prior platinum chemotherapy; n = 268); and third-line or higher (cohort 3, with at least two prior chemotherapies of which one is platinum-based; n = 252). It was observed that BIRCH achieved its primary goal by exhibiting a significant increase in ORR (18% to 22% for the three cohorts) in Atezolizumab treated patients compared to historical controls, and most of the responses are ongoing. Also, the MS (minimum of 20 months follow-up) for cohort 1 was 23.5 months, cohort two was 15.5, and cohort 3 was 13.2 months. Thus, the trial showcased responses with good tolerability for Atezolizumab monotherapy in advanced-stage NSCLC patients with PD-L1 selected tumors.

Another phase II trial (POPLAR, NCT01903993 , randomized, open-label, 287 participants) assessed the safety and efficacy of Atezolizumab-based immunotherapy compared to docetaxel therapy in NSCLC patients pre-treated with platinum-based chemotherapy [ 179 ]. Volunteers were randomly distributed (1:1) into two groups where one group received intravenous Atezolizumab (1,200 mg) and the other received docetaxel (75 mg/m 2 ), both for three weeks intervals. As observed at the primary endpoint, the OS was improved for Atezolizumab (12.6 months) compared to Docetaxel (9.7 months, HR 0.73, P = 0.04). This can be attributed to the alteration in PD-L1 expression. Also, a diminution of treatment-induced grade 3/4 AEs in patients treated with Atezolizumab (11%) versus the docetaxel treated group (39%) strongly advocated for the possible benefits of Atezolizumab in NSCLC patients who received previous treatments [ 179 ]. Finally, the propitious outcomes obtained in the BIRCH and POPLAR trials led to the FDA approval of Atezolizumab for patients with advanced NSCLC. The NCT01846416 trial tested the drug as monotherapy for PD-L1 positive patients with advanced non-metastatic NSCLC. The third one, Avelumab, has demonstrated reasonable clinical efficacy and safety profile in NSCLC patients untreated previously and unselected for PD-L1 expression through NCT01772004 and NCT02395172 [ 180 ]. However, further investigations are required to prescribe the drug for practical applicability. NSCLC tumor PD-L1 expression has become an essential determinant of clinical pathology and frontline treatment. A summary of the treatment strategy in different crucial clinical trials is shown in Fig. 6 . Though the studies help draw certain conclusions, more studies are needed to draw meaningful comparisons to improve NSCLC immunotherapy for both PD-L1 high and low populations. Fig. 6 Scheme of treatment with immunotherapy in NSCLC. The algorithm helps the physician decide on the available treatments for different types of lung cancers. Their consensus sequencing techniques. PD-L1 testing and histological subtype determination should be done by a multidisciplinary team for all patients. The role of driver mutation, as shown, is important in determining treatment modalities

Anti-T-cell immunoreceptor with Ig and ITIM domain (TIGIT) checkpoint inhibitor Tiragolumab suppresses innate and adaptive immunity in PD-L1-positive metastatic NSCLC and has received the Breakthrough Therapy Designation (BTD) by FDA [ 181 ]. LAG3 and FGL1 expression promote tumor development by suppressing the immune system and are amongst the most promising immune checkpoints. LAG3 accumulates on CD4 + and CD25-T cell surfaces in TILs and is also identified in the cytoplasm of NSCLC cells, while FGL1 is identified in NSCLC cell's cytoplasm [ 182 ]. LAG-3 antibody (liratrimab) may have therapeutic utility as a third ICI route after PD-1 and CTLA-4. A soluble LAG-3 protein eftilagimod alpha (Efti; IMP321) is also undergoing a phase II study (TACTI-002) ( NCT03625323 ) in combination with pembrolizumab on metastatic NSCLC patients [ 183 ]. Nobel ICPs are emerging and need to be investigated as single agents and combinations. The current immunotherapy pipelines have concentrated on functional, cellular, and molecular readouts but lack mechanistic knowledge of immunotherapy targets.

Classification of lung cancer progression patterns and grading and updating the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) in relation to ICIs and associated diagnostic markers can help better design the clinical trial endpoints. Understanding the immune-related adverse events (irAEs) concerning different ICIs and therapeutic combinations can help plan better neutralizing mechanisms. Using appropriate pre-clinical models, including human-specific organoid models, humanized mice, and rigorous pharmacokinetic/ pharmacodynamic analysis, can help reduce clinical trial failures. Further investigation regarding the ICI treatment duration, rechallenge, and dose-ranging need attention. Advances in single-cell genomics, multiplex immunofluorescence, and multi-omic platforms encourage therapeutic discovery by finding and evaluating new immunotherapy targets. AI-based algorithms are currently being considered for radiological, pathological, and diagnostic data analysis and can help build successful immunotherapies and data-driven medication schedules and combinations. Recently Sun et al. developed a radiomics-based biomarker of tumor-infiltrating CD8 cells on patients in a phase I study with anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 monotherapy. They proposed imaging biomarkers may assess CD8 cell count, correlate with tumor immune profile, and predict immunotherapy patient outcomes in many solid tumors, including lung cancer [ 184 ]. The deployment of artificial intelligence in prospective clinical trials is constrained by various obstacles, such as the lack of a high-quality training data set, validation data set, code sharing, and transparency, despite the technology's innovation and significant promise [ 185 ].

Immunotherapy in SCLC

Lung SCLC, mostly begotten by cigarette smoking, is an abjectly differentiated, fast-growing, high-grade, malignant epithelial cell carcinoma originating from neuroendocrine cells within the bronchial airways. SCLC cells are morphologically diverse, with poorly defined borders, tiny cytosol, granulated nuclear chromatin, and absence or unobtrusive nucleoli with a high mitotic count [ 186 , 187 ]. 5% of SCLCs can be originated from extrapulmonary regions, including the nasopharynx, GI tract, and genitourinary tract [ 188 – 190 ]. However, SCLCs of pulmonary and extra-pulmonary origins have similar clinical and biological features characterized by rapid growth and early widespread metastasis [ 191 – 194 ]. About 70% of patients with ED-SCLC have apparent metastases at the time of diagnosis. The remaining 30% have LD-SCLC, defined by tumors confined to the hemithorax [ 195 , 196 ]. This inevitably results in a poor prognosis for the patients, with MS being 15–20 months and 8–13 months for LD and ED-SCLC, respectively [ 195 ]. Similarly, SR on average over 5 years interval is 10%–13% and 1%–2% for LD and ED-SCLC patients, respectively [ 195 , 197 ].

The aggressive nature of SCLC can be ascribed to its high TMB, which includes the bi-allelic deactivation of tumor suppressor genes, such as p53 and Rb1, in nearly all tumors incidences [ 198 ]. High TMB-associated generation of a higher number of neoantigens allows an enhanced presentation to the T cells leading to a heightened immunological response and may be exploited to create efficient immunotherapeutics. [ 199 , 200 ]. SCLC has long been considered immunogenic due to its association with paraneoplastic disorders, such as Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome (LEMS) in patients. This results from immune responses directed against specific antigenic targets (HuD, HuC, and Hel-N1) expressed on both SCLC and normal nerve cells [ 201 – 205 ]. Intriguingly, SCLC patients having LEMS are likely to obtain a better prognosis, which can be attributed to the phenomenon that the immune response directed against the nervous system can also target the tumor cells [ 203 ]. Also, better OS was observed in patients whose tumors were infiltrated with more CD45 + T cells, independent of stage and performance status. A correlation between higher effector-to-regulatory T-cell ratios and prolonged OS was established [ 202 , 204 , 205 ]. Recent developments have been remarkable in immunotherapy-based approaches for SCLC, such as ICIs, antigen-specific vaccines, and tumor vaccines, fostering hope for a general increase in the SR, OS, and patient quality of life.

Antigen-specific vaccines and SCLC

A vaccine-based approach has often been considered ideal for SCLC patients, especially those who have recently completed chemotherapy cycles, due to its minimal toxicity potential. Almost four decades ago, gangliosides and glycolipids were identified as therapeutic targets for the treatment of melanoma [ 206 , 207 ]. Soon it was noted that most SCLC cell lines express GD3, a glycosphingolipid (ceramide and oligosaccharide) or oligoglycosylceramide containing one or multiple sialic acids (i.e., n-acetylneuraminic acid), which prompted the evaluation of BEC2, the anti-idiotypic mAbs mimicking GD3 ganglioside in SCLC patients [ 208 ]. In a pilot trial conducted on 15 patients who were administered BEC-2 adjuvanted with BCG after completion of initial chemotherapy, the OS was enhanced by 21 months [ 209 ]. Further large-scale trials, sponsored by the European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer, detected a 40% increase in survival. The combination has currently been licensed by ImClone Systems, USA, and Merck Oncology in Europe, Australia, and New Zealand.

Upon further investigations and trials, four other antigens—GM2, Globo H, fucosyl GM1, and polysialic acid emerged as antigenic targets for immunotherapy in SCLC based on immune-histochemical analyses of tumor samples [ 210 ]. Although the immunogenicity for GM2 and Globo H was well-understood in other forms of malignant cancers, fucosyl GM1 and polysialic acid were selectively expressed in SCLC alone [ 211 – 215 ]. All the antigens were tested as conjugates with KLH and QS-21 as the adjuvant for administration in patients who completed initial chemotherapy or radiation therapy. Additionally, It was ensured that the patients were not taking systemic corticosteroids and were free from any underlying immune deficiencies or peripheral sensory neuropathy greater than Grade 1 [ 206 ]. Although some immune-specific responses had been noted in patients administered with the antigens, trials with a bigger cohort are still needed to validate their efficacy in the prognosis for SCLC patients.

Another target antigen recently surfaced in the treatment of SCLC is p53. An initial trial with 29 ED-SCLC patients given the p53 vaccine plus chemotherapy showed a high overall response rate (ORR). Similarly, induction of immune response (40–50%) and tolerability of a dendritic cell-based vaccine with modified p53 (INGN-225) was evaluated in a phase I/II study [ 216 ]. However, the optimal treatment in all of the above cases may not suffice with vaccination alone and ought to be coupled with chemotherapy scrupulously [ 217 ]. Thus, further trials are required to verify the role and extent of antigen-specific vaccines as a potential therapeutic approach in patients with SCLC. In another innovative approach by Sakamoto et al., the efficacy of a personalized peptide vaccination (PPV) was evaluated in a phase II trial where a maximum of 4 HLA-matched peptide sequences were selected from a previously established IgG response-specific peptide library [ 218 ]. The PPV was subcutaneously administered, in which 46 patients were enrolled. Each of the four groups of patients had a MS of 466 (0; n = 5), 397 (1; n = 15), 401 (2; n = 12), and 107 days (3; n = 14), respectively, in terms of prior treatment regimens. After one and two vaccination rounds, peptide-specific IgG responses increased in 70% and 95% of patients. OS was considerably longer in individuals with increased IgG responses after the second immunization cycle (1237 vs. 382 days; P = 0.010) than in patients with enhanced IgG responses. Despite some positive outcomes in OS prolongation and immune rejuvenation, further evaluation of its efficacy in eventual randomized trials is necessary.

Immune-checkpoint inhibitors for SCLC

Blocking the immune checkpoints with mAbs has gained significant attention as a promising therapeutic tool in oncology, including SCLC [ 5 , 219 ]. While eliciting an antigen-specific T-cell response, costimulatory and co-inhibitory factors play a key role in immune regulation post-stimulation of the TCR [ 220 ]. After the TCR recognizes the antigenic peptides displayed by both the classes of MHC I & II molecules on the surface of antigen-presenting cells (APC), the entire T-cell activation process requires a second costimulatory signal generated by the costimulatory T-cell surface receptor CD28 that binds to B7 ligand subtypes CD80 and CD86 present on APCs surface [ 5 , 221 ]. T-cell activation and subsequent immunological response are aided by the co-stimulation of CD28 with other related molecules, such as CD134 and CD137. Another fraction of molecules, viz., CTLA-4, PD-1, B7-H3, and B7x abate antigen-specific immune responses by restricting their magnitude and duration. These co-inhibition molecules are called “immune checkpoint proteins,” and inhibition of these protein pathways (immune-checkpoint inhibition) by blocking CTLA-4 and PD-L1 with mAbs, etc., have shown potential advances in cancer immunotherapy [ 219 ].

It has been postulated that PD-1 and its ligand on the SCLC cells may be involved in tumor cell growth inhibition. [ 222 ]. Pembrolizumab is an anti–PD-1 mAb designed to block the PD-1/PD-L1 pathway. To test the efficacy of this antibody, in the KEYNOTE-028 phase Ib trial, 24 patients with PD-L1 + ED-SCLC who had completed initial chemotherapy received Pembrolizumab. Although the study produced an ORR of 35%, with lasting responses over more than 16 weeks, the related AE rate was 53% [ 223 ]. In another study, using immunohistochemistry, Ishii et al. examined the expression of PD-L1 in 102 SCLC patients where 71.6% of volunteers expressed PD-L1, and its correlation with LD-SCLC was established. The results revealed that MS was 16.3 months in the PD-L1( +) subset and 7.3 months in the patients not expressing PD-L1 ( P < 0.001) [ 224 ]. Few more prospective trials ( NCT02359019 and NCT02403920) investigating Pembrolizumab with chemotherapy or Pembrolizumab with chemotherapy and radiotherapy for use in SCLC are ongoing. These clinical studies are trying to address the issue of limited treatment options for patients with metastatic SCLC who are on platinum-based chemotherapy, which may help SCLC patients.

Similarly, as previously mentioned, CTLA-4 is an immune checkpoint protein that is expressed on activated T cells, which is widely studied for its capacity to down-regulate T-cell activities [ 225 ]. With the development of fully human mAbs such as Ipilimumab, CTLA-4 has become an attractive therapeutic target for cancer. Of many recent clinical trials, a randomized phase II study has explored the combinatorial application of Ipilimumab with paclitaxel and carboplatin as the first-line treatment in ED-SCLC [ 226 ]. The outcome revealed that phased Ipilimumab improved the PFS compared to concurrent Ipilimumab. The OS of the two groups were 12.5 and 9.1 months respectively, with no significant difference ( P = 0.13) [ 226 ]. Prompted by the outcomes, a phase III clinical trial ( NCT01450761 ) of Ipilimumab along with chemotherapy compared to chemotherapy alone has commenced in ED-SCLC patients.

In addition, another phase I/II clinical trial (Checkmate 032, NCT01928394 ) evaluated the effectiveness of Nivolumab (an anti-PD-1 mAb) coupled with or without Ipilimumab in patients with limited-stage or extensive-stage SCLC relapse after at least one platinum-containing regimen [ 227 ]. The results presented that Nivolumab monotherapy and Nivolumab in combination with Ipilimumab exhibited anticancer activity with protracted responses and the adverse events were tolerable. More such trials are in-line. Thus, the constant efforts to improvise these strategies give us the hope of better future outcomes for SCLC prognosis and treatment.

Combination immunotherapy approaches

Because the immune response is dynamic, evidence suggests that combination therapy may improve cancer patient survival compared to monotherapy. Anti-angiogenic agents, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and T-cell modulation are investigated in combination with immunotherapy. The arsenal of immunotherapeutics is rapidly gaining ground while unveiling new challenges. Finding the optimal therapy combinations, doses, and order of administration in specific cancer genotypes needs to be investigated. Other challenges are irAEs, finding suitable biomarkers for immunotherapy response, resistance to immunotherapy, and making the non-responders benefit from combination therapy. Understanding the tumor type, TME-mediated immunosuppression, immune profile of the tumor, and tumor genotypic profiling may help address some of the challenges. AI can analyze and categorize input data and produce models to anticipate molecular interactions, the efficiency of combination therapies, and predict poor prognosis associated genotypes and needs further attention. The forthcoming section summarizes the present state of combination therapy and clinical application.

Immunotherapy with Anti-angiogenic agents for targeting NSCLC

There is no dearth of preclinical evidence for the general validity of the proposition that angiogenesis is crucial for tumor growth, and it possesses a convoluted relation with tumor immunity, i.e., antiangiogenic compounds can invigorate the immune system while cancer immunotherapy turns to be antiangiogenic [ 228 – 230 ]. More importantly, a combination of these two can have a synergistic impact on inhibiting tumor growth. The immunosuppressive TME, comprising VEGF as a major modulator of immune response, endorses tumor cells towards evasion of immune surveillance [ 231 ]. VEGF (i) blocks lymphocyte trafficking across activated tumor endothelium by inducing clustering defects at the endothelial cell surface, (ii) inhibits tumor infiltration of the T cells via upregulation of the Fas ligand, (iii) induces proliferation in immune suppressors, viz., Tregs and myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs), etc. [ 232 – 234 ]. Antiangiogenic therapy normalizes the tumor blood vessels decreasing interstitial fluid pressure, thereby enhancing drug penetration within the tumor and synergizing with chemotherapy and immunotherapy [ 235 , 236 ]. A study comprising 125 advanced NSCLC patients showed that anti-VEGF therapy, bevacizumab, mediated metabolic changes of the tumor through the LKB1/AMPK pathway, which correlates with increased survival [ 237 ]. Many preclinical and clinical data also hint at the possibility of synergy between immunotherapy and anti-angiogenic therapy in NSCLC, enhancing the potential of both [ 238 ]. For instance, using an in vivo NSCLC model, Tao et al. showed that immunotherapy in combination with bevacizumab inhibits tumor growth synergistically, and the approach holds promise for clinical translation [ 239 ]. Multiple clinical trials are ongoing with this combinatorial approach and, hopefully, will move from bench side to bedside shortly [ 240 , 241 ].

Chemo-immunotherapy in lung cancer

As discussed in the earlier sections, inhibition of the PD-1 receptor or PD-L1 is the mainstay of action of current immunotherapy agents in NSCLC and SCLC. Nonetheless, the combinatorial applications of immunotherapeutic agents with Chemotherapy drugs have emerged as a much-practiced method for managing progressive disease. Below we discuss the same elaborately. Few more trials like the NCT02486718 (IMpower010), NCT02657434 (IMpower132), NCT02409342 (IMpower110), NCT02367781 (IMpower130), and NCT02366143 (IMpower150) are ongoing to test the efficacy of Atezolizumab with chemotherapy. Furthermore, several combination treatments of the drug with other intervention approaches such as the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib ( NCT01988896 ), the tyrosine kinase inhibitor drug cabozantinib ( NCT03170960 ), the anti-VEGF-A humanized monoclonal IgG Bevacizumab ( NCT03836066 , NCT03616691 ), etc. are also being evaluated.

Chemo-immunotherapy in NSCLC

The primary immunotherapy agents employed are Pembrolizumab, Atezolizumab, Durvalumab, Nivolumab, and Ipilimumab. Figure 6 briefly depicts the strategy taken for the treatment with immunotherapy in NSCLC.

Pembrolizumab

It is an immune checkpoint inhibitor for the PD-1 receptor, which improves anti-tumor immunity. As per treatment guidelines, every patient with metastatic NSCLC should undergo IHC testing for PD-L1 expression and other driver mutations like EGFR, ALK, ROS-1, and BRAF before starting treatment [ 242 ].

As first-line therapy

In eligible patients (Performance status 0–2 and no contraindication for immunotherapy) with metastatic NSCLC irrespective of histology with PD-L1 level ≥ 50% and with none of the driver mutations (EGFR, ALK, ROS-1, BRAF), Pembrolizumab is recommended as first-line monotherapy. Patients with PD-L1 expression 1–49% and all driver mutations remaining negative are recommended Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy as the first-line therapy. For Non-Squamous/Adenocarcinoma, combination chemotherapy of Carboplatin or Cisplatin with Pemetrexed is preferred with Pembrolizumab. In patients with squamous cell histology, combination chemotherapy of Carboplatin and Paclitaxel/Albumin bound paclitaxel is preferred with Pembrolizumab [ 243 ]. KEYNOTE-024 trial aimed at comparing Pembrolizumab monotherapy vs. platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line therapy for NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression level ≥ 50% and driver mutations negative. It showed an improved response rate and MS with Pembrolizumab monotherapy (30.0 vs. 14.2 months) [ 174 ]. KEYNOTE-189, a randomized phase III trial with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC patients, compared Pembrolizumab and Carboplatin or Cisplatin and Pemetrexed vs. chemotherapy alone. It showed better OS at 1 year with Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (69.2% vs. 49.4%) [ 244 ]. KEYNOTE-407, a randomized phase III trial performed with metastatic squamous cell NSCLC patients, also evaluated the efficacy of Pembrolizumab together with Carboplatin and Paclitaxelor Albumin bound Paclitaxel. It resulted with improved MS in case of Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (15.9 vs. 11.3 months) [ 245 ].

As subsequent therapy

KEYNOTE 010, a phase III randomized trial carried out with advanced NSCLC patients who were previously treated and PD-L1 positive ≥ 1% and driver mutation-negative compared Pembrolizumab with chemotherapy (Docetaxel). It showed more prolonged overall survival for Pembrolizumab [ 246 ].

Atezolizumab

As first-line therapy

It is recommended as first-line therapy with ABCP regimen (Atezolizumab + Bevacizumab + Carboplatin + Paclitaxel) in patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC [ 247 ]. IMpower 150, a phase III randomized trial, evaluated the efficacy of first-line therapy with the ABCP regimen in patients with metastatic non-squamous NSCLC vs. Bevacizumab and chemotherapy, resulting in better MS (19.2 vs. 14.7 months) [ 248 ].

As subsequent therapy

Patients with metastatic NSCLC, during or after systemic therapy, are recommended with Atezolizumab as subsequent therapy. In a phase III randomized trial, OAK, Atezolizumab, and Docetaxel were compared as subsequent therapy in metastatic NSCLC patients, where Atezolizumab exhibited a better OS. [ 249 , 250 ].

Durvalumab

PACIFIC, In a phase III randomized trial, PACIFIC, the efficacy of adjuvant treatment with Durvalumab was estimated as consolidation immunotherapy compared to placebo with unresectable stage III NSCLC after receiving treatment with concurrent treatment chemoradiation. The result showed increased OS and PFS (17.2 vs. 5.6 months) after Durvalumab consolidation therapy [ 251 ].

Nivolumab with or without ipilimumab

Nivolumab and Ipilimumab are immune checkpoint inhibitors with a complementary mechanism of action on T-cells where Nivolumab inhibits PD-1 receptors, and Ipilimumab is a human CTLA-4 blocking antibody.

As first-line therapy

In a phase III randomized trial, CheckMate 227, first-line Nivolumab/Ipilimumab was evaluated in comparison to Nivolumab monotherapy and chemotherapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC with high TMB (TMB ≥ 10 mutations per megabase) and negative for any driver mutations. It reports a better median PFS for Nivolumab/Ipilimumab (7.2 vs. 5.5 months) [ 169 ].

As subsequent therapy

In CheckMate 057, a phase III randomized trial, the efficacy of Nivolumab was compared with Docetaxel as subsequent therapy for metastatic non-squamous NSCLC patients during or after first-line chemotherapy. The trial reports better MS in the Nivolumab arm (12.2 vs. 9.4 months) [ 166 ]. In another phase III randomized trial, CheckMate 017, the efficacy of Nivolumab was also compared with Docetaxel as subsequent therapy for metastatic squamous cell NSCLC patients who had disease progression after chemotherapy. The report showed better MS with Nivolumab (9.2 vs. 6 months) [ 167 ].

Chemo-immunotherapy in SCLC

Immunotherapy is only indicated in patients with extensive-stage SCLC

As first-line therapy

IMpower 133, a phase III randomized trial with ED-SCLC patients, adding Atezolizumab to Platinum and etoposide demonstrates improved MS (12.3 vs. 10.3 months) than platinum plus etoposide, which was standard of care for many years [ 252 ]. The observed survival advantage in IMpower 133 trial is independent of the PD-L1 expression and the TMB levels. Atezolizumab, in combination with the etoposide-platinum, is now recommended as first-line therapy by the NCCN panel for patients with ED-SCLC [ 243 , 253 ]. CASPIAN trial is another randomized phase III trial that evaluated Durvalumab with etoposide-platinum in comparison to etoposide-platinum only as first-line therapy for ED-SCLC patients. Durvalumab, in combination with chemotherapy, significantly improved the OS [ 254 ].

As subsequent therapy

Pembrolizumab is recommended as subsequent therapy in patients with relapsed SCLC regardless of PD-L1 level following the recent analysis of two studies, KEYNOTE 028 and KEYNOTE 158 [ 255 ]. Nivolumab alone or with Ipilimumab is recommended as new subsequent therapy for patients who have relapsed within 6 months after first-line therapy. Checkmate 331, a randomized phase III trial, suggested using Nivolumab monotherapy. Also, CheckMate 032, a phase II trial, reported using Nivolumab in combination with Ipilimumab in relapsed patients [ 227 ]. Patients who progress after receiving first-line Atezolizumab should not be treated with any other immunotherapy.

Radiation and immunotherapy

Though few trials are ongoing to evaluate the efficacy of any immune CKIs for use as concurrent therapy with radiation in cases of early or locally advanced lung cancer, there is no definite recommendation to date [ 256 ]. After the PACIFIC trial, Durvalumab has been recently recommended as consolidation immunotherapy in patients of unresectable stage III NSCLC post-treatment with concurrent chemoradiation [ 166 ].

Immunomodulatory nanomedicine for use in lung cancer

Our prior discussion shows that immune stimulation is required for cancer treatment to detect and annihilate the non-self-antigens and create a memory effect as a future remedy. While a myriad of immunotherapeutics has obtained commendable results in the treatment of various cancers, they also faced some daunting challenges such as low water solubility, poor pharmacokinetic profiles viz., less absorption, less accumulation in the tumor region, thereby less bioactivity after prolonged circulation, and enhanced immune-mediated off-target toxicity [ 257 , 258 ]. To our intrigue, nanotechnology, with all its propitious facets, is capable of addressing the existing and ensuing issues, thereby accomplishing the expected achievement level in terms of therapeutic benefits [ 259 – 262 ]. With a better understanding of the tumor microenvironment, smart stimuli-responsive nanocarriers are being developed to take advantage of acidic pH, hypoxia, increased ATP synthesis, changed redox state of cancer cells, and other factors [ 263 ]. It turns out that nanoparticles enhance the benefits of cancer immunotherapy via (i) providing protection to antigens and adjuvants, (ii) simultaneous delivery to the APC (iii) TME reprogramming to recommence immune surveillance.

As of now, a multitude of nanomaterials have demonstrated their immunomodulatory potential in pre-clinical, and few of them have undergone various phases of clinical trials [ 264 , 265 ]. For instance, a liposomal cancer vaccine (L-BLP25) was developed by Oncothyreon Canada Inc., where the antigen tecemotide (carcinoma-associated human MUC-1) and an adjuvant 3- O -Deacyl-4’-monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL) were inserted into the lipid bilayer made up of 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine (DPPC), 1,2-dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phospho-(1'-rac-glycerol) (DMPG), and cholesterol. Of many clinical trials performed with it worldwide, a phase IIb trial ( NCT00157209 ) with patients with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC demonstrated an increment of 4.2 months in MS in the group receiving L-BLP25 compared to the cohort receiving BSC only. In a subset comprising patients with stage IIIB loco-regional NSCLC, an enhancement of 17.3 months in MS was observed, where the treatment group showed 49% 3-year survival compared to the control group with BSC showing 27% [ 266 ]. More light should be shed on the tailoring of patient-oriented cancer immunotherapy in concordance with the eventful and changeful dynamics of TME, which will help determine the timing and dosing of the therapeutic schedule. For instance, another phase III trial revealed that the liposomal tecemotide vaccine with concurrent chemoradiotherapy ( NCT00409188 ) improved the OS to 9 months while sequential administration of chemoradiotherapy could not extend the OS, which hints at the importance of the timing of combinatorial therapy [ 267 ]. Table 3 summarizes a few clinical trials where the safety and efficacy of nanomaterials were evaluated for use in lung cancer immunotherapy. Table 3 Clinical trials where the safety and efficacy of nanomaterials were evaluated for use in lung cancer immunotherapy Clinical Trial ID Drug Delivery System Cancer Status Duration Sponsor/ Agency NCT 02,049,151 Tecemotide Following Concurrent Chemo-radiotherapy Liposome Unresectable Stage III NSCLC Phase III (USA) 2014–2015 EMD Serono/Oncothyreon Canada Inc NCT 00,960,115 Tecemotide Following Chemotherapy Liposome Unresectable Stage III NSCLC phase I/II (Japan) 2009–2015 Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany NCT 01,015,443 Tecemotide Following primary Chemo-radiotherapy Liposome Unresectable Stage III NSCLC Phase III (Asian population) 2009–2015 Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany NCT 00,828,009 Tecemotide with bevacizumab after chemotherapy and radiation therapy Liposome Unresectable Stage IIIA/IIIB NSCLC Phase II (USA) 2010–2019 ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group NCT 00,157,196 Tecemotide with single-dose low CPA Liposome Stage IIIA NSCLC Phase II 2005–2012 Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany NCT 00,157,209 Tecemotide with single-dose low CPA Liposome Stage IIIB/Stage IV NSCLC Phase IIB (Germany) 2000–2012 Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany NCT 00,409,188 Tecemotide with single-dose low CPA Liposome Unresectable Stage III NSCLC Phase III (23 countries) 2007–2012 EMD Serono NCT 03,836,352 DPX-Survivac with low dose Cyclophosphamide & Pembrolizumab Liposome NSCLC and other carcinomas Phase II (USA/Canada) 2018–2023 ImmunoVaccine Technologies, Inc. (IMV Inc.) NCT 00,291,473 Mixed cancer vaccines, CHP-HER2 and CHP-NY-ESO-1 with OK-432 (Picibanil) Cholesterol-Bearing Hydrophobized Pullulan Lung cancer and other carcinomas Phase I (Japan) 2005–2008 Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research NCT 01,853,878 Recombinant PRAME protein combined with the AS15 Adjuvant System GSK2302032A Liposome NSCLC after removal of the tumor Phase II (9 countries) 2013–2016 GlaxoSmithKline NCT 01,258,868 Tumor Cell Vaccines with ISCOMATRIX Adjuvant and Celecoxib Liposome Lung cancer and other carcinomas Phase I (USA) 2010–2016 National Cancer Institute (NCI)

Few preclinical studies also elicited remarkable potential of nano-platforms for cancer immunotherapy. Interestingly, Moon and colleagues in 2017 synthesized a stable and homogeneous lipoprotein nanodisc, comprising phospholipids and 22 amino acid apolipoprotein mimetic peptides, to deliver neoantigen vaccines to draining lymph nodes. The nanodiscs evoked a strong anti-tumor T-cell response, eradicating established tumors and inhibiting metastatic tumor growth on murine lungs [ 268 ]. Alongside tissue and cellular targeting, molecular targeting has also shown great potential in cancer treatment, and their combinations with conventional chemotherapy have improved PFS in a phase III clinical trial with NSCLC patients having EGFR mutations [ 269 ]. It has also been proven now that the molecular targeting drugs can initiate immune responses via various mechanisms such as (i) aiding in antigen presentation by APC, (ii) instigating ICD in tumor cells, (iii) promoting T cell infiltration in TME, (iv) triggering NK cells, (v) attenuating the number of MDSCs, Treg, TAMs in TME. Nanotechnology and nanomaterials were used to improve molecularly targeted immunomodulation [ 270 ]. In 2020, Norvaline/Sunitinib encapsulating CuS photo-thermal nanoparticles were developed by Domvri et al. to target and exhaust MDSC subsets in lung TME. A549 tumor xenograft experiment revealed a marked anti-tumor effect simultaneously evoking strong innate and adaptive immune responses. It was shown that tumor infiltration of both CD8 + and CD4 + T cells was enhanced, and NK cells were activated with the diminution of MDSCs and Foxp3 + Treg cells (immune tolerance) [ 271 ]. A significant number of studies are ongoing to explore further the role of immunomodulatory nanomedicine in lung cancer immunotherapy, and we envisage an upsurge in their implications in the near future.

Immunomodulatory nutraceuticals in lung cancer

In recent years, the use of nutraceuticals in the prevention and supportive care of cancer patients has drawn significant attention from researchers across the globe, and enormous efforts have been directed toward deciphering their therapeutic role and immunomodulatory mechanism of action in different cancers. For instance, the impact of curcumin had already been demonstrated by various groups in many tumor growth inhibition studies, which revealed its anti-cancer, anti-angiogenesis, and anti-metastatic properties. Recently, Zou et al. conducted a study with lung cancer patients, which showed that a two-week treatment with curcumin arrested the Treg cells and enhanced peripheral Th1 cells. Importantly, a conversion of Tregs to Th1 cells was observed via downregulating transcription of Foxp3 and upregulating the expression of IFN-γ, which can be attributed to curcumin treatment [ 272 ]. Even more recently, in a mechanistic investigation, dose-dependent regulation of PD-L1 expression by resveratrol was observed. At a lower concentration (< 5 μM), it induced PD-L1 expression in various lung cancer cells (H1299, A549, H460) via activating the Wnt pathway, but it inhibited PD-L1 expression at a higher dose (> 40 μM) [ 273 ]. Other nutraceuticals include apigenin, luteolin, phloretin, saponin, capsaicin, gallic acid, caffeic acid phenethyl ester, zerumbone, quercetin, etc. have also demonstrated their immunomodulatory potential against lung cancer. We provide a collection of evidence accumulated in recent years for immunomodulatory nutraceutical intervention in Table 4 [ 274 – 283 ]. It has been demonstrated that tumor-related inflammatory responses had the unanticipated effect of tumorigenesis and progression, assisting incipient abysmally grown tumors. Inflammation promotes neoplastic progression by generating an increasing number of signaling molecules, including EGF. Table 4 Anti-proliferative, anti-inflammatory, and antioxidant potential of nutraceuticals against lung cancer Target Compound Source Bioactivity Lung Cancer Curcumin Curcuma longa Converted Foxp3 + regulatory T cells to Th1 cells in patients with lung cancer Resveratrol grapes, wine, peanuts Enhanced binding of β-catenin/TCF to PD-L1 promoter and increased PD-L1 expression. A higher dose (> 40 μM) resulted in a progressive reduction of PD-L1 Apigenin Parsley Suppressed the translocation of NF-κB from the cytoplasm to the nucleus, which further inhibited target genes that block apoptosis Phloretin Apples Exerted anti-inflammatory activities on A549 cancer cell lines by reducing intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1) and cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 expression and suppressing monocyte adhesion through inhibition of MAPK, PI3K/Akt, and NF-κB signaling pathways Edible macro-fungi beta-glucan Significantly increased IFN-γ mRNA expression, increased M1 phenotype, and attenuated M2 phenotype of TAM Saponin P. polyphylla Smith var. chinensis (Franch.) Hara Decreased serum levels of TNF-α, IL-8, and IL-10, decreased expressions of proinflammatory cytokines MCP-1, IL-6, and TGF-β1 Capsaicin Chili Inhibited the upregulation of TNF-α, IL-6, COX-2, and NF-κB expression Luteolin Broccoli, Apple skin Inhibited monocyte recruitment and cancer cell migration via suppression of the TAM-secreted CCL2 Gallic acid Grape seeds, rose flowers, sumac, oak, and witch hazel Suppressed LPS-induced NF-κB activation in A549 lung cancer cells, inhibited IFN-γ, IL-6, IL-1β & NF-κB regulated anti-apoptotic genes expression Caffeic acid phenethyl ester Propolis Inhibited NF-kB, caffeic acid phenethyl ester significantly diminished the induction of inflammatory gene Zerumbone Zingiber officinalis Inhibited lung carcinogenesis by modulating the expression of NF-κB and heme oxygenase-1 Quercetin Grapes, Berries Suppressed the nuclear translocation of NF-κB and reduced levels of inflammatory cytokine TNF-α, IL-1, and IL-6, significantly increasing the NK-cell-mediated cytotoxic activity against lung cancer cells EPA, DHA, and Se Fish oil and Selenium yeast Synergistically decreased the population of splenic Tregs and MDSCs and thus augmented host anti-tumor immunity against lung carcinoma

It has been elicited that tumor-related inflammatory responses had the unanticipated effect of exacerbating tumorigenesis and progression, helping incipient abysmally grown tumors acquire cancer-specific salient characteristics and promote their impending development into full-blown cancers. Inflammation contributes to neoplastic growth by providing a growing list of signaling molecules: EGF, VEGF, FGF2, chemokines, cytokines that promote the inflammatory state, and matrix-degrading MMPs, cysteine cathepsin proteases, heparanase, and inductive signals that lead to activation of epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), etc. Moreover, inflammatory cells secrete chemicals, particularly reactive oxygen species (ROS), which are proactively mutagenic for neighboring tumor cells, facilitating their genetic evolution.

oxidant properties have extensively been used in research to explore their anti-cancer, anti-angiogenesis, and anti-metastatic properties [ 284 ]. Anti-inflammatory agents have increasingly been used as effective adjuvants for conventional therapies, and three mechanisms have been proposed—(i) chemo-protection, (ii) alterations in pharmacokinetics or metabolism, and (iii) chemo-sensitization [ 285 , 286 ]. Notably, a study by Menendez and colleagues in 2016 revealed that oral intake of silibinin significantly inhibited brain metastasis of NSCLC patients. Marked tumor growth inhibition was also shown in NSCLC xenograft by oral gavage of silibinin [ 287 ]. Taken together, therapeutic immunomodulatory nutraceutical intervention has conferred several benefits in lung cancer in both preclinical and clinical settings.

Ongoing clinical trials for immunotherapeutics

Different clinical trials are ongoing to assess various existing and new immunotherapeutic agents developed worldwide to assess their application in the management of lung cancer. A few recent trials conducted on NSCLC and SCLC patients are mentioned in Tables 5 and 6 [ 242 , 243 ]. It is to be noted that the important phase II/III trials whose results have been analyzed have already been discussed in the previous sections. A few important ongoing trials are discussed below. Table 5 Ongoing randomized phase II and phase III Trials in Early and Locally Advanced NSCLC Neoadjuvant Strategy Trial Identifier (NCT reference) Phase Drug/Treatment IB-IIIA CheckMate 816 (NCT 02,998,528) III Nivo + Ipi vs. chemotherapy IIIA ( NCT03081689 ) II Nivo + chemotherapy IB (> 3 cm)-IIIA TOP 1501 ( NCT02818920 ) II Pembro IB (> 4 cm)-IIIA PRINCEPS ( NCT02994576 ) II Atezo IB-IIIA MAC ( NCT02716038 ) II Atezo + chemotherapy I (> 2 cm)-IIIA ( NCT02904954 ) II Durva or Durva + SRBT IB(> 4 cm)-IIIA ANVIL (NCT 02,595,944) III Nivo vs Obs IB(> 4 cm)-IIIA PEARLS( NCT02504372 ) III Pembro vs. placebo IB(> 4 cm)-IIIA IMpower010( NCT02486718 ) III Atezo vs. BSC IB(> 4 cm)-IIIA BR-31( NCT02273375 ) III Durva vs. placebo Unresectable III A/B RTOG3505( NCT02768558 ) III CRT Nivo vs. placebo Early stage unresected NSCLC NCT03833154 III Durvalumab + SBRT vs placebo + SBRT vs Osimertinib + SBRT IIA- IIIB NSCLC ALCHEMIST ( NCT04267848 ) III Pembrolizumab + chemotherapy Early stage NSCLC CANOPY-N( NCT03968419 ) II Canakinumab ± Pembro III-IV NSCLC NCT03793179 III Pembro ± chemotherapy III-IV NSCLC IGNYTE( NCT03767348 ) II RP 1 ± Nivolumab PD-L1 expressing NSCLC NCT04432207 I IMU-201 (PD1-Vaxx) III-IV NSCLC NCT04007744 I Pembro + Sonidegib Abbreviations: Nivo Nivolumab, Ipi ipilimumab, Pembro Pembrolizumab, Atezo Atezolizumab, Durva Durvalumab, SBRT Stereotactic body radiotherapy, Obs Observation, BSC Best supportive care, CRT chemoradiotherapy Table 6 Ongoing Clinical Trials Investigating Immunotherapy in SCLC Trial Identifier (NCT reference) Drug/Target Phase Treatment Regimen Limited stage NCT02402920 Pembro/PD-1 I MK-3475 + PE + Thoracic RT NCT02934503 Pembro/PD-1 II Pembro + PE + Thoracic RT Extensive stage NCT03066778 Pembro/PD-1 III Pembro + PE vs Placebo + PE NCT02763579 Atezo/PD-L1 I/II Atezo + Carboplatin + Etoposide Vs. Placebo + Carboplatin + Etoposide Extensive stage-Maintenance NCT03043599 Ipi Nivo/CTLA-4 PD-1 I/II Consolidative Ipi + Nivo and maintenance Nivo with Thoracic RT after platinum-based chemotherapy RAPTOR ( NCT04402788 ) Atezo II/III Atezo vs Atezo + RT Extensive stage-Second-line and beyond NCT03026166 Ipi Nivo/CTLA-4 PD-1 I/II Rova-T and Nivo or Rova-T and Nivo plus Ipi 1 mg/kg or Rova-T and Nivo plus Ipi 3 mg/kg Abbreviations: Pembro Pembrolizumab, PE platinum/etoposide, Rt Radiotherapy, Atezo Atezolizumab, PD-1 Programmed cell death-1, Ipi ipilimumab, Nivo Nivolumab, CTLA-4 cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen, Rova-T Rovalpituzumab tesirine, Durva Durvalumab

CheckMate 816 is a phase III trial among 326 stage IB-IIIA NSCLC patients for comparing treatment outcomes with Nivolumab and Ipilimumab versus standard chemotherapy. PEARLS is a phase III trial in stage IB-IIIA of 1380 NSCLC patients comparing DFS between Pembrolizumab versus placebo. IMpower010, a phase III trial in stage IB-III A of 1127 NSCLC patients, is directed to assess the difference in DFS between Atezolizumab and best supportive care. Another crucial ongoing phase III trial of unresectable III A/B, 660 NSCLC patients is RTOG3505 and aims to compare OS and PFS after chemotherapy followed by Nivolumab versus placebo. Another phase III ALCHEMIST clinical trial (ANVIL) examines the effect of adjuvant Nivolumab in OS and/or DFS over standard observation after surgery and standard adjuvant therapy in 714 stage IB-IIIA NSCLC patients. The other notable phase III trial is NCT03066778 , in 430 extensive-stage SCLC patients expressing PD-1 compares PFS with Pembrolizumab and Platinum/Etoposide versus placebo and Platinum/Etoposide. In another ongoing phase II/III trial (RAPTOR) with extensive-stage SCLC patients in maintenance therapy,138 patients in phase II, and 186 patients in phase III are compared for PFS with Atezolizumab alone versus Atezolizumab and radiotherapy. While NCT02934503 : This is a phase II trial on 60 extensive stages SCLC patients assessing progression-free survival with Pembrolizumab, Platinum/Etoposide, and Radiotherapy.

Major obstacle and future perspective for lung cancer treatment

Immunotherapy has shown tremendous promise in lung cancer therapy but is still in its infancy. A significant hurdle is the absence of optimal appropriately standardized in vitro and in vivo laboratory-based, preclinical, and clinical model systems in evaluating the efficacy, mechanism, kinetics, and toxicity of immunotherapy and immune modulators [ 288 ]. Immunocompetent mouse-in-mouse models are often used, including the genetically engineered mouse models (GEMMs), chemically induced models, and syngeneic tumor graft models [ 289 , 290 ]. Though existing models address some aspects, they do not provide the complete coverage needed to understand the basic mechanisms of immune biology and to evaluate new immunotherapies. Humanized mice, or human immune system (HIS) mice, which have both the human immune system and human tumors, are increasingly employed in preclinical immunotherapy investigations but are extremely costly [ 291 ]. Organoids or tumoroid with immune cell 3D co-culture models and microfluidic-based organoids-on-a-chip models are developed to use patient-derived tumor cells. These technologies have great potential but are still in the early stage of development. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop trustworthy models for understanding the dominant drivers of cancer immunity, immune mechanism, therapeutics, primary and secondary immune escape, synthetic immunity, and toxicity studies for translational cancer immunotherapy.

Further research is essential to understand better different immune aspects of lung cancer, including immune escape, immunosuppression, immune editing, and tumor-intrinsic adaptive response to immunotherapeutic stress, to reactivate and reliably channel the patient's immunity against cancer. Combination immunotherapy is effective, but there is no consensus on selecting the treatment strategy. Future NSCLC therapies will possibly comprise a combination of chemotherapy, neoantigen vaccinations, and several ICIs to target the rewired tumor signaling pathways. In combination with ipilimumab, nivolumab is the most potential immunotherapy cocktail for advanced NSCLC patients. The prospect of different classes of novel immune modulators in combination immunotherapy is almost unexplored. The safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of monotherapy and combination immunotherapeutics are now being studied in clinical trials. Epigenetic alterations in a complex interaction with genetic alterations lead to lung tumorigenesis. Changes in the epigenetic landscape can cause dysregulation of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes, leading to heightened proliferation, faster cell cycles, apoptosis resistance, and immune modulation [ 292 ]. Epigenetic therapy is mainly focused on DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (DNMTi), histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi), Janus kinase 2 inhibitors and RNA-based therapeutics in combination with immunotherapeutics can boost the effectiveness of current lung cancer therapies for long-term patient survival [ 293 ]. Co-targeting tumor-intrinsic and tumor ecosystem-associated adaptive stress pathways, including metabolic, oxidative, endoplasmic reticulum, DNA damage, and replication stress response, can help design translatable combination therapies. Immunotherapeutics can be combined with epigenetic inhibitors (e.g., DNMTi, HDACi, EZH2i) to target epigenetics-mediated tumorigenesis and immunosuppression.

The advent of bulk and single-cell multi-omics studies has paved the way to evaluate and customize immunotherapy at a personalized level. Each patient's tumor is unique, and the collection of all somatic cancer mutations found in a single tumor is termed ‘mutanome’. Lung cancer and smoking are interlinked and may exhibit smoking-associated neoepitope signatures. Personalized and unique lung cancer-specific neoantigens can be detected and.

targeted by ACT therapy. The ACT arsenal for lung cancer treatment is expanding. CAR T, TCR, and TIL therapy have made significant clinical inroads, but several challenges exist and are discussed in the respective section. Chemokines influence T cell recruitment and infiltration into lung tumors, and a higher CD4 + and CD8 + T lymphocyte infiltration is a favorable prognostic indicator [ 294 ]. Jin et al. recently used CCR6-expressing CAR T cells to target lung cancer using a xenograft mouse model and showed promising T cell infiltration and tumor killing [ 295 ]. Earlier Adachi et al. engineered CAR-T cells to express IL-7 and CCL19 (crucial for maintaining T-cell zones in lymphoid organs) and showed promising results with Lewis Lung carcinoma in a mouse model [ 296 ]. Additionally, improvements in multi-omic platforms at a single cell level and access to publicly available data sets can help better apprehend the immune landscape for educated therapeutic selection.

A personalized immunotherapy approach needs to be investigated in lung cancer. Tumor heterogeneity can be a significant bottleneck in designing personalized immunotherapies. The immune microenvironment is dynamic, and spatiotemporal analysis of different types of lung cancer can help understand the immune repertoire, antigen-presentation modes, and immune editing. Recent developments in multi-spectral analysis techniques, like multiplex immunofluorescence (MIF), Imaging mass cytometry (IMC), Chipcytometry, Multiplexed Ion Beam Imaging (MIBI), DNA barcoding-based mIHC/IF, and insitu-plex can help in deciphering the tumor immune repertoire [ 297 ]. Whole exome sequencing (WES), RNA-seq, single-cell sequencing, and TCR sequencing can reveal the tumor mutanome and cell-specific TCRs that are neoantigen-specific and aid in the cancer vaccination approach [ 298 ]. Several factors like TCR diversity, TCR degeneracy, neoantigen clonality, neoantigen subtype, and differential agretopicity index offer challenges. Each patient's cancer cells have a unique cocktail of neoantigen–MHC complexes (termed the neoantigenome). Multiple AI-based multi-component computational algorithms can examine the binding complementarity of the mutant peptide and the patient's HLA alleles and evaluate the potential to develop an anti-tumor T cell response. AI approaches like TSNAD, pVAC-Seq, INTEGRATE-neo, NetMHCpan, MARIA, EDGE, and DeepHLApan employ multi-layer architecture to find patterns and predict MHC-I/II binding and neoantigen binding efficacy and immunogenicity [ 299 – 301 ]. Though in silico binding prediction can yield helpful information, LC–MS/MS analysis of MHC molecules immunoprecipitation and peptide identification will produce an accurate and robust database, e.g., The Immune Epitope Database (IEDB) [ 301 ]. Personalized neoantigen identification can help develop next-generation immunotherapeutics. For preclinical and clinical applications, the binding affinity of the neoantigen to the corresponding MHC is predicted, and affinities greater than 500 nM are considered immunogenic neoepitopes and subsequently selected for the development of customized cancer vaccines [ 302 ]. There is an urgent need to discover lung cancer-specific composite biomarkers for categorizing tumor immunogenicity, patient stratification, pharmacodynamic prediction, and finalizing regulatory endpoint to improve lung cancer immunotherapy. Recent advances in AI-based algorithms and models will soon be able to predict immunotherapy and combination therapy responses at a personalized level to further the efficacious use of immunotherapy at a clinical level [ 303 ].

Though immunotherapy incites immunememory and is the most promising way to treat cancer and is better tolerated with minimum side effects as per clinical data, some patients suffer from immune-related adverse effects (irAEs) [ 304 ]. The side effects include flu-like symptoms, skin rash, pain, edema, heart palpitations, diarrhea, an overly activated immune status, and damaging organ systems. Cytokine release syndrome and onset of diabetes are also observed in CAR-T and immunotherapy patients. Interstitial and alveolar infiltrates followed by pneumonitis is the most common immune-related adverse event in the lung [ 305 ]. Though immunosuppressive corticosteroids are the choice for treating irAEs but are also reported to reduce the efficacy of the immunotherapy. Studies regarding immunomodulatory nanomaterials and nutraceuticals may open up new avenues in addressing irAEs and autoimmune toxicities. Additional research is required to comprehend the process of irAE better to manage the adverse effects of lung cancer immunotherapy.

Conclusion

With the discovery of immunotherapy, the therapeutic paradigm for patients with advanced lung cancer has fundamentally transformed lung cancer treatment and is still evolving. ICIs have improved patient OS while causing fewer adverse effects than traditional chemotherapeutic medicines and have become an integral part of treatment algorithms. Several possible therapeutic options are available for advanced-stage lung cancer patients, from single-agent immunotherapy to quadruple therapy, which combines immunotherapy with chemotherapy and anti-vascular endothelial growth factor medications. In order to treat advanced lung cancer patients, the U.S. FDA has approved immunotherapy medications alone or in combination with other immunotherapies and chemotherapy, as reviewed in this article. Generation of resistance to ICIs, whether intrinsic or acquired, is a significant issue for the oncology community. Cellular therapy is a potential and practical addition to the arsenal of lung cancer immunotherapies. Due to the absence of tumor-specific antigens, a hostile TME, and toxicity, cellular treatment is an attractive but unquestionably challenging prospect. Clinical studies evaluate innovative therapeutic methods, including the combination and sequencing of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with different ICIs and DNA repair targeting medicines. Overall, the therapeutic advantages of ICIs and ACT have exhibited promising trends for efficacious lung cancer therapy in the future.

Abbreviations

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons

World Health Organization

Non-small cell lung cancer

Small cell lung cancer

Lung adenocarcinoma

Lung squamous cell carcinoma

Large cell carcinoma

Low-dose computed tomography

Limited disease SCLC

Extensive disease SCLC

Median survival

Tumor-specific antigen

Tumor-associated antigens

Natural killer cells

Dendritic cells

Macrophages

Antigen presenting cell

Monoclonal antibody

Major histocompatibility complex

International Association for the study of Lung Cancer

Checkpoint inhibitor

Programmed cell death-1

Programmed death-ligand 1

U.S. Food and Drug Administration

Epidermal growth factor

Best supportive care

Cancer testis antigen

New York esophageal squamous cell carcinoma 1

Melanoma-associated antigen-A3

Disease-free survival

Mucin 1

Modified Vaccinia Virus Ankara

Transforming growth factor β2

Cytotoxic T lymphocytes

Adoptive cell therapy

T-cell receptor

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes

Chimeric antigen receptor-modified T cells

Carcinoembryonic antigen

Mesothelin

Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2

Glypican-3

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-modified T cells

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte

T-cell receptor

Human leukocyte antigen

Tumor mutational burden

Bispecific T-cell engagers

Receptor tyrosine kinase-like orphan receptor

Double-negative T cells

Oncolytic Virus

Herpes Simplex Virus-1

Coxsackievirus B3

Immunogenic cell death

Oncolytic vaccinia viruses

Seneca Valley Virus isolate 001

Antibody–drug conjugate

Bispecific antibodies

Immune-related progression-free survival

Objective response

Adverse event

T cell immunoreceptor with Ig and ITIM domains

Breakthrough therapy designation

Overall response rate

Personalized peptide vaccination

Tumor mutational burden

Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome

Epithelial-mesenchymal transition

Reactive oxygen species

Genetically engineered mouse models

Human immune system mice

3-O-Deacyl-4’-monophosphoryl lipid A

1,2-Dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine

1,2-Dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phospho-(1'-rac-glycerol)

Myeloid-derived suppressor cells

Regulatory T cells

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Acknowledgements

A.M. takes this opportunity to acknowledge Raktim Chattopadhyay of Esperer Onco Nutrition Pvt. Ltd. for his constant support. M.K.P. acknowledges S. Dubinett and B. Gomperts from UCLA for providing constant support and mentoring.

Authors’ contributions

AL, AM, AnM, MP, wrote the paper; PP, NS, PuP, BB, AnM, MP, edited the paper; MP made the figures; MP, final edits and submission. The author(s) read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

No Funding available.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

On behalf of the author(s), the corresponding author certifies the accuracy of the content given to the journal. The corresponding author ensures that all the co-authors have agreed to all of the contents and will notify all the authors when the manuscript is accepted. The corresponding author is answerable to all the inquiries on behalf of all the co-authors. The corresponding author ensures that all authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and that all are aware of the submission of the paper. The corresponding author is solely responsible for maintaining a proper communication with the journal and between co-authors before and after publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

References

1. Siegel RL Miller KD Fuchs HE Jemal A Cancer statistics 2022 CA Cancer J Clin 2022 72 1 7 33 10.3322/caac.21708 35020204

2. Bray F Ferlay J Soerjomataram I Siegel RL Torre LA Jemal A Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries CA Cancer J Clin 2018 68 6 394 424 10.3322/caac.21492 30207593

3. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts and Figures 2015. 2015. https://www.cancer.org/cancer-facts-and-figures-2015.pdf .

4. Kanwal M, Ding XJ, Cao Y. Familial risk for lung cancer. Oncol Lett. 2017;13(2):535–42. 10.3892/ol.2016.5518. Epub 2016 Dec 20. 10.3892/ol.2016.5518 PMC5351216 28356926

5. Li Q Yuan D Ma C Liu Y Ma L Lv T A new hope: the immunotherapy in small cell lung cancer Neoplasma 2016 63 3 342 350 10.4149/302_151001N511 26925794

6. Molina JR Yang P Cassivi SD Schild SE Adjei AA Non-small cell lung cancer: epidemiology, risk factors, treatment, and survivorship Mayo Clin Proc 2008 83 5 584 594 10.1016/S0025-6196(11)60735-0 18452692 PMC2718421

7. Travis WD Brambilla E Nicholson AG Yatabe Y Austin JHM Beasley MB The 2015 world health organization classification of lung tumors: impact of genetic, clinical and radiologic advances since the 2004 classification J Thor Oncol Publication Int Assoc Study Lung Cancer 2015 10 9 1243 1260 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000630 26291008

8. Inamura K Lung cancer: understanding its molecular pathology and the 2015 WHO classification Front Oncol 2017 7 193 10.3389/fonc.2017.00193 28894699 PMC5581350

9. Boloker G Wang C Zhang J Updated statistics of lung and bronchus cancer in United States (2018) J Thorac Dis 2018 10 3 1158 1161 10.21037/jtd.2018.03.15 29708136 PMC5906235

10. Siegel RL Miller KD Jemal A Cancer statistics 2018 CA Cancer J Clin 2018 68 1 7 30 10.3322/caac.21442 29313949

11. Yasumoto K Hanagiri T Takenoyama M Lung cancer-associated tumor antigens and the present status of immunotherapy against non-small-cell lung cancer Gen Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009 57 9 449 457 10.1007/s11748-008-0433-6 19756930

12. Gulley JL Spigel D Kelly K Chandler JC Rajan A Hassan R Avelumab (MSB0010718C), an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in advanced NSCLC patients: A phase 1b, open-label expansion trial in patients progressing after platinum-based chemotherapy J Clin Oncol 2015 33 15_suppl 8034 10.1200/jco.2015.33.15_suppl.8034

13. Dyer O US task force recommends extending lung cancer screenings to over 50s BMJ 2021 372 n698 10.1136/bmj.n698 33707175

14. Khanna P Blais N Gaudreau PO Corrales-Rodriguez L Immunotherapy comes of age in lung cancer Clin Lung Cancer 2017 18 1 13 22 10.1016/j.cllc.2016.06.006 27461776

15. Rolfo C Caglevic C Santarpia M Araujo A Giovannetti E Gallardo CD Immunotherapy in NSCLC: a promising and revolutionary weapon Adv Exp Med Biol 2017 995 97 125 10.1007/978-3-319-53156-4_5 28321814

16. Arcaro A Targeted therapies for small cell lung cancer: Where do we stand? Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2015 95 2 154 164 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2015.03.001 25800975

17. Jotte R Conkling P Reynolds C Galsky MD Klein L Fitzgibbons JF Randomized phase II trial of single-agent amrubicin or topotecan as second-line treatment in patients with small-cell lung cancer sensitive to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy J Clin Oncol 2011 29 3 287 293 10.1200/JCO.2010.29.8851 21135284

18. Slotman BJ van Tinteren H Which patients with extensive stage small-cell lung cancer should and should not receive thoracic radiotherapy? Transl Lung Cancer Res 2015 4 3 292 294 26207217 10.3978/j.issn.2218-6751.2015.04.07 PMC4483470

19. Kalemkerian GP Akerley W Bogner P Borghaei H Chow LQ Downey RJ Small cell lung cancer J Natl Compr Cancer Netw JNCCN 2013 11 1 78 98 10.6004/jnccn.2013.0011 23307984 PMC3715060

20. Kalemkerian GP Gadgeel SM Modern staging of small cell lung cancer J Natl Compr Cancer Netw JNCCN 2013 11 1 99 104 10.6004/jnccn.2013.0012 23307985

21. Spigel DR Greco FA Rubin MS Shipley D Thompson DS Lubiner ET Phase II study of maintenance sunitinib following irinotecan and carboplatin as first-line treatment for patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer Lung Cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 2012 77 2 359 364 10.1016/j.lungcan.2012.03.009 22560921

22. Seegobin K Majeed U Wiest N Manochakian R Lou Y Zhao Y Immunotherapy in non-small cell lung cancer with actionable mutations other than EGFR Front Oncol 2021 11 750657 10.3389/fonc.2021.750657 34926258 PMC8671626

23. Forde PM Kelly RJ Brahmer JR New strategies in lung cancer: translating immunotherapy into clinical practice Clin Cancer Res 2014 20 1067 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0731 24470514

24. Pardoll D Does the immune system see tumors as foreign or self? Annu Rev Immunol 2003 21 807 839 10.1146/annurev.immunol.21.120601.141135 12615893

25. Malhotra J Jabbour SK Aisner J Current state of immunotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer Transl Lung Cancer Res 2017 6 2 196 211 10.21037/tlcr.2017.03.01 28529902 PMC5420529

26. Raez LE Cassileth PA Schlesselman JJ Sridhar K Padmanabhan S Fisher EZ Allogeneic vaccination with a B7.1 HLA-A gene-modified adenocarcinoma cell line in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer J Clin Oncol 2004 22 14 2800 7 10.1200/JCO.2004.10.197 15254047

27. Massarelli E Papadimitrakopoulou V Welsh J Tang C Tsao AS Immunotherapy in lung cancer Transl Lung Cancer Res 2014 3 1 53 63 25806281 10.3978/j.issn.2218-6751.2014.01.01 PMC4367607

28. Wang J Zou ZH Xia HL He JX Zhong NS Tao AL Strengths and weaknesses of immunotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis of 12 randomized controlled trials PLoS ONE 2012 7 3 e32695 10.1371/journal.pone.0032695 22403699 PMC3293858

29. Couraud S Zalcman G Milleron B Morin F Souquet PJ Lung cancer in never smokers--a review Eur J Cancer (Oxford, England 1990) 2012 48 9 1299 311 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.03.007 22464348

30. Noguchi M Morikawa A Kawasaki M Matsuno Y Yamada T Hirohashi S Small adenocarcinoma of the lung Histol Characteristics Prognosis Cancer 1995 75 12 2844 2852 10.1002/1097-0142(19950615)75:12<2844::aid-cncr2820751209>3.0.co;2-# 7773933

31. Travis WD Travis LB Devesa SS Lung cancer Cancer 1995 75 1 Suppl 191 202 10.1002/1097-0142(19950101)75:1+<191::AID-CNCR2820751307>3.0.CO;2-Y 8000996

32. Stellman SD Muscat JE Hoffmann D Wynder EL Impact of filter cigarette smoking on lung cancer histology Prev Med 1997 26 4 451 456 10.1006/pmed.1997.0212 9245665

33. Aros CJ Paul MK Pantoja CJ Bisht B Meneses LK Vijayaraj P High-throughput drug screening identifies a potent wnt inhibitor that promotes airway basal stem cell homeostasis Cell Rep 2020 30 7 2055 64.e5 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.01.059 32075752 PMC7050206

34. Kenfield SA Wei EK Stampfer MJ Rosner BA Colditz GA Comparison of aspects of smoking among the four histological types of lung cancer Tob Control 2008 17 3 198 204 10.1136/tc.2007.022582 18390646 PMC3044470

35. Muscat JE Stellman SD Zhang ZF Neugut AI Wynder EL Cigarette smoking and large cell carcinoma of the lung Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 1997 6 7 477 480 9232332

36. Brambilla EPB Geisinger K Travis WBE Müller-Hermelink H Large cell carcinoma World Health Organization Classification of Tumours Pathology and Genetics of Tumours of the Lung 2004 Pleura, Thymus and Heart Geneva WHO Press 45 50

37. Chansky K Sculier JP Crowley JJ Giroux D Van Meerbeeck J Goldstraw P The international association for the study of lung cancer staging project: prognostic factors and pathologic TNM stage in surgically managed non-small cell lung cancer J Thorac Oncol 2009 4 7 792 801 10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181a7716e 19458556

38. Siegel RL Miller KD Jemal A Cancer Statistics,2017 CA Cancer J Clin 2017 67 1 7 30 10.3322/caac.21387 28055103

39. Thomas A Rajan A Giaccone G Tyrosine kinase inhibitors in lung cancer Hematol/Oncol Clinics North Am 2012 26 3 589 605 10.1016/j.hoc.2012.02.001 PMC3334853 22520981

40. Salehi-Rad R Li R Paul MK Dubinett SM Liu B The biology of lung cancer Clin Chest Med 2020 41 1 25 38 10.1016/j.ccm.2019.10.003 32008627

41. Ruwali M, Moharir K, Singh S, Aggarwal PK, Paul M. Updates in pharmacogenetics of non-small cell lung cancer. Pharmacogenetics. 2021:1–20. https://www.intechopen.com/books/10578 .

42. S. Chauhan D, Mudaliar P, Basu S, Aich J, K. Paul M. Tumor-derived exosome and immune modulation. Extracellular vesicles - role in diseases pathogenesis and therapy [Working Title]. Physiology 2022

43. Genova C Dellepiane C Carrega P Sommariva S Ferlazzo G Pronzato P Therapeutic implications of tumor microenvironment in lung cancer: focus on immune checkpoint blockade Front Immunol 2022 12 799455 10.3389/fimmu.2021.799455 35069581 PMC8777268

44. Sellars MC Wu CJ Fritsch EF Cancer vaccines: Building a bridge over troubled waters Cell 2022 185 2770 10.1016/j.cell.2022.06.035 35835100 PMC9555301

45. Kelly RJ Giaccone G Lung cancer vaccines Cancer J (Sudbury, Mass) 2011 17 5 302 308 10.1097/PPO.0b013e318233e6b4 PMC3196521 21952280

46. Finn OJ Cancer vaccines: between the idea and the reality Nat Rev Immunol 2003 3 8 630 641 10.1038/nri1150 12974478

47. Cuppens K Vansteenkiste J Vaccination therapy for non-small-cell lung cancer Curr Opin Oncol 2014 26 2 165 170 10.1097/CCO.0000000000000052 24441502

48. Saavedra D Crombet T CIMAvax-EGF: a new therapeutic vaccine for advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients Front Immunol 2017 8 269 10.3389/fimmu.2017.00269 28348561 PMC5346887

49. Neninger Vinageras E de la Torre A Osorio Rodríguez M Catalá Ferrer M Bravo I Mendoza del Pino M Phase II randomized controlled trial of an epidermal growth factor vaccine in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer J Clin Oncol 2008 26 9 1452 8 10.1200/JCO.2007.11.5980 18349395

50. Rodriguez PC Popa X Martínez O Mendoza S Santiesteban E Crespo T A phase III clinical trial of the epidermal growth factor vaccine CIMAvax-EGF as switch maintenance therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer patients Clin Cancer Res 2016 22 15 3782 3790 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-0855 26927662

51. Scanlan MJ Gure AO Jungbluth AA Old LJ Chen YT Cancer/testis antigens: an expanding family of targets for cancer immunotherapy Immunol Rev 2002 188 22 32 10.1034/j.1600-065X.2002.18803.x 12445278

52. Gjerstorff MF Andersen MH Ditzel HJ Oncogenic cancer/testis antigens: prime candidates for immunotherapy Oncotarget 2015 6 18 15772 15787 10.18632/oncotarget.4694 26158218 PMC4599236

53. Grah JJ Katalinic D Juretic A Santek F Samarzija M Clinical significance of immunohistochemical expression of cancer/testis tumor-associated antigens (MAGE-A1, MAGE-A3/4, NY-ESO-1) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer Tumori 2014 100 1 60 68 10.1177/1430.15817 24675493

54. Vansteenkiste JF Cho BC Vanakesa T De Pas T Zielinski M Kim MS Efficacy of the MAGE-A3 cancer immunotherapeutic as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected MAGE-A3-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (MAGRIT): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol 2016 17 6 822 835 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)00099-1 27132212

55. Gure AO Chua R Williamson B Gonen M Ferrera CA Gnjatic S Cancer-testis genes are coordinately expressed and are markers of poor outcome in non-small cell lung cancer Clin Cancer Res 2005 11 22 8055 8062 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-1203 16299236

56. John T Starmans MH Chen YT Russell PA Barnett SA White SC The role of Cancer-Testis antigens as predictive and prognostic markers in non-small cell lung cancer PLoS ONE 2013 8 7 e67876 10.1371/journal.pone.0067876 23935846 PMC3720740

57. Murphy R Green S Ritter G Cohen L Ryan D Woods W Recombinant NY-ESO-1 cancer antigen: production and purification under cGMP conditions Prep Biochem Biotechnol 2005 35 2 119 134 10.1081/PB-200054732 15881594

58. Raina D Kosugi M Ahmad R Panchamoorthy G Rajabi H Alam M Dependence on the MUC1-C oncoprotein in non-small cell lung cancer cells Mol Cancer Ther 2011 10 5 806 816 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-10-1050 21421804 PMC3092019

59. Butts C Murray N Maksymiuk A Goss G Marshall E Soulières D Randomized phase IIB trial of BLP25 liposome vaccine in stage IIIB and IV non-small-cell lung cancer J Clin Oncol 2005 23 27 6674 6681 10.1200/JCO.2005.13.011 16170175

60. Butts C Maksymiuk A Goss G Soulières D Marshall E Cormier Y Updated survival analysis in patients with stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer receiving BLP25 liposome vaccine (L-BLP25): phase IIB randomized, multicenter, open-label trial J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2011 137 9 1337 1342 10.1007/s00432-011-1003-3 21744082 PMC11828286

61. Butts C Murray RN Smith CJ Ellis PM Jasas K Maksymiuk A A multicenter open-label study to assess the safety of a new formulation of BLP25 liposome vaccine in patients with unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer Clin Lung Cancer 2010 11 6 391 395 10.3816/CLC.2010.n.101 21071331

62. Weng TY Yen MC Huang CT Hung JJ Chen YL Chen WC DNA vaccine elicits an efficient antitumor response by targeting the mutant Kras in a transgenic mouse lung cancer model Gene Ther 2014 21 10 888 896 10.1038/gt.2014.67 25077772

63. Vansteenkiste JF Cho BC Vanakesa T De Pas T Zielinski M Kim MS Efficacy of the MAGE-A3 cancer immunotherapeutic as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected MAGE-A3-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (MAGRIT): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol 2016 17 6 822 835 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)00099-1 27132212

64. Lopes A Vandermeulen G Préat V Cancer DNA vaccines: current preclinical and clinical developments and future perspectives J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2019 38 1 146 10.1186/s13046-019-1154-7 30953535 PMC6449928

65. Limacher JM Quoix E TG4010: A therapeutic vaccine against MUC1 expressing tumors Oncoimmunology 2012 1 5 791 792 10.4161/onci.19863 22934285 PMC3429597

66. Rochlitz C Figlin R Squiban P Salzberg M Pless M Herrmann R Phase I immunotherapy with a modified vaccinia virus (MVA) expressing human MUC1 as antigen-specific immunotherapy in patients with MUC1-positive advanced cancer J Gene Med 2003 5 8 690 699 10.1002/jgm.397 12898638

67. Ramlau R Quoix E Rolski J Pless M Lena H Lévy E A phase II study of Tg4010 (Mva-Muc1-Il2) in association with chemotherapy in patients with stage III/IV Non-small cell lung cancer J Thorac Oncol 2008 3 7 735 744 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31817c6b4f 18594319

68. Ramlau R Quoix E Rolski J Pless M Lena H Lévy E A Phase II Study of Tg4010 (Mva-Muc1-Il2) in association with chemotherapy in patients with stage III/IV non-small cell lung cancer J Thorac Oncol 2008 3 7 735 744 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31817c6b4f 18594319

69. Zhao Y Liu Z Li L Wu J Zhang H Zhang H Oncolytic adenovirus: prospects for cancer immunotherapy Front Microbiol 2021 12 707290 10.3389/fmicb.2021.707290 34367111 PMC8334181

70. Lee JM Lee M-H Garon E Goldman JW Salehi-Rad R Baratelli FE Phase I trial of intratumoral injection of CCL21 gene-modified dendritic cells in lung cancer elicits tumor-specific immune responses and CD8+ T-cell infiltration Clin Cancer Res 2017 23 16 4556 4568 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-2821 28468947 PMC5599263

71. Salehi-Rad R, Li R, Liu B, Lim R, Tran L, Ong S, et al. Intratumoral CCL21-Gene Modified Dendritic Cells (CCL21-DC) Combined with Checkpoint Blockade in Murine Models of Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) with Varying Mutational Load. B98 Targeting the Immune System in Lung Cancer Progression. 2019;199:A4034A. https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1164/ajrccm-conference.2019.199.1_MeetingAbstracts.A4034 .

72. Fu C Zhou L Mi Q-S Jiang A DC-based vaccines for cancer immunotherapy Vaccines 2020 8 4 706 10.3390/vaccines8040706 33255895 PMC7712957

73. Srivatsan S Patel JM Bozeman EN Imasuen IE He S Daniels D Allogeneic tumor cell vaccines: the promise and limitations in clinical trials Hum Vaccin Immunother 2014 10 1 52 63 10.4161/hv.26568 24064957 PMC4181031

74. Suzuki H Owada Y Watanabe Y Inoue T Fukuharav M Yamaura T Recent advances in immunotherapy for non-small-cell lung cancer Hum Vaccin Immunother 2014 10 2 352 357 10.4161/hv.26919 24196313 PMC4185902

75. Miyazono K Positive and negative regulation of TGF-beta signaling J Cell Sci 2000 113 Pt 7 1101 1109 10.1242/jcs.113.7.1101 10704361

76. Houot R Schultz LM Marabelle A Kohrt H T-cell–based Immunotherapy: adoptive cell transfer and checkpoint inhibition Cancer Immunol Res 2015 3 10 1115 1122 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-15-0190 26438444

77. Tan E Gakhar N Kirtane K TCR gene-engineered cell therapy for solid tumors Best Pract Res Clin Haematol 2021 34 3 101285 10.1016/j.beha.2021.101285 34625228

78. Sterner RC Sterner RM CAR-T cell therapy: current limitations and potential strategies Blood Cancer J 2021 11 4 69 10.1038/s41408-021-00459-7 33824268 PMC8024391

79. Zhong S Cui Y Liu Q Chen S CAR-T cell therapy for lung cancer: a promising but challenging future J Thorac Dis 2020 12 8 4516 4521 10.21037/jtd.2020.03.118 32944366 PMC7475572

80. Caliendo F Dukhinova M Siciliano V Engineered cell-based therapeutics: synthetic biology meets immunology Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2019 7 43 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00043 30937303 PMC6431652

81. Xiao B-F Zhang J-T Zhu Y-G Cui X-R Lu Z-M Yu B-T Chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy in lung cancer: potential and challenges Front Immunol 2021 12 782775 10.3389/fimmu.2021.782775 34790207 PMC8591168

82. Chocarro L Arasanz H Fernández-Rubio L Blanco E Echaide M Bocanegra A CAR-T cells for the treatment of lung cancer Life 2022 12 4 561 10.3390/life12040561 35455052 PMC9028981

83. Qu J Mei Q Chen L Zhou J Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T-cell therapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC): current status and future perspectives Cancer Immunol Immunother 2020 70 3 619 631 10.1007/s00262-020-02735-0 33025047 PMC7907037

84. Bao C Gao Q Li L-L Han L Zhang B Ding Y The application of nanobody in CAR-T therapy Biomolecules 2021 11 2 238 10.3390/biom11020238 33567640 PMC7914546

85. Hawkins ER D’Souza RR Klampatsa A Armored CAR T-cells: the next chapter in T-cell cancer immunotherapy Biologics Targets Ther 2021 15 95 105 10.2147/BTT.S291768 PMC8053711 33883875

86 Zhou S Liu M Ren F Meng X Yu J The landscape of bispecific T cell engager in cancer treatment Biomarker Res 2021 9 1 38 10.1186/s40364-021-00294-9 PMC8157659 34039409

87. Saltos A Khalil F Smith M Li J Schell M Antonia SJ Clinical associations of mucin 1 in human lung cancer and precancerous lesions Oncotarget 2018 9 86 35666 35675 10.18632/oncotarget.26278 30479696 PMC6235019

88. Wei X Lai Y Li J Qin L Xu Y Zhao R PSCA and MUC1 in non-small-cell lung cancer as targets of chimeric antigen receptor T cells Oncoimmunology 2017 6 3 e1284722 10.1080/2162402X.2017.1284722 28405515 PMC5384358

89. Zhang C Hao X Prognostic significance of CD276 in non-small cell lung cancer Open Med 2019 14 1 805 812 10.1515/med-2019-0076 PMC6843478 31737785

90. Li F Chen H Wang D Silencing of CD276 suppresses lung cancer progression by regulating integrin signaling J Thorac Dis 2020 12 5 2137 2145 10.21037/jtd.2020.04.41 32642118 PMC7330387

91. McGowan E Lin Q Ma G Yin H Chen S Lin Y PD-1 disrupted CAR-T cells in the treatment of solid tumors: promises and challenges Biomed Pharmacother 2020 121 109625 10.1016/j.biopha.2019.109625 31733578

92. Qu J, Mei Q, Liu L, Cheng T, Wang P, Chen L, et al. The progress and challenge of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immunotherapy in treating non-small cell lung cancer. Therapeutic advances in medical oncology. 2021;13. 10.1177/1758835921992968 PMC7890731 33643442

93. Li G Guo J Zheng Y Ding W Han Z Qin L CXCR5 guides migration and tumor eradication of anti-EGFR chimeric antigen receptor T cells Molecular Therapy - Oncolytics 2021 22 507 517 10.1016/j.omto.2021.07.003 34553036 PMC8433065

94. Ning J Jiang S Li X Wang Y Deng X Zhang Z GPC3 affects the prognosis of lung adenocarcinoma and lung squamous cell carcinoma BMC Pulm Med 2021 21 1 199 10.1186/s12890-021-01549-9 34112123 PMC8194200

95. Hou AJ Chang ZL Lorenzini MH Zah E Chen YY TGF-β-responsive CAR-T cells promote anti-tumor immune function Bioeng Transl Med 2018 3 2 75 86 10.1002/btm2.10097 30065964 PMC6063867

96. Liu M Wang X Li W Yu X Flores-Villanueva P Xu-Monette ZY Targeting PD-L1 in non-small cell lung cancer using CAR T cells Oncogenesis 2020 9 8 72 10.1038/s41389-020-00257-z 32792499 PMC7426958

97. Villanueva N Bazhenova L New strategies in immunotherapy for lung cancer: beyond PD-1/PD-L1 Ther Adv Respir Dis 2018 12 1753466618794133 10.1177/1753466618794133 30215300 PMC6144513

98. Zeltsman M Dozier J McGee E Ngai D Adusumilli PS CAR T-cell therapy for lung cancer and malignant pleural mesothelioma Transl Res 2017 187 1 10 10.1016/j.trsl.2017.04.004 28502785 PMC5581988

99. Zhang C Zhuang Q Liu J Liu X Synthetic Biology in Chimeric Antigen Receptor T (CAR T) Cell engineering ACS Synth Biol 2022 11 1 1 15 10.1021/acssynbio.1c00256 35005887

100. Barrett DM Liu X Jiang S June CH Grupp SA Zhao Y Regimen-specific effects of RNA-modified chimeric antigen receptor T cells in mice with advanced leukemia Hum Gene Ther 2013 24 8 717 727 10.1089/hum.2013.075 23883116 PMC3746289

101. Di Stasi A Tey SK Dotti G Fujita Y Kennedy-Nasser A Martinez C Inducible apoptosis as a safety switch for adoptive cell therapy N Engl J Med 2011 365 18 1673 1683 10.1056/NEJMoa1106152 22047558 PMC3236370

102. Beatty GL Haas AR Maus MV Torigian DA Soulen MC Plesa G Mesothelin-specific chimeric antigen receptor mRNA-engineered T cells induce anti-tumor activity in solid malignancies Cancer Immunol Res 2014 2 2 112 120 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-13-0170 24579088 PMC3932715

103 Dimitri A Herbst F Fraietta JA Engineering the next-generation of CAR T-cells with CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing Mol Cancer 2022 21 1 78 10.1186/s12943-022-01559-z 35303871 PMC8932053

104. Saffern M Samstein R Taking CAR T cells up a synthetic Notch Nat Rev Immunol 2021 21 3 135 10.1038/s41577-021-00514-1 33568784

105 Shafer P Kelly LM Hoyos V Cancer therapy with TCR-Engineered T cells: current strategies, challenges, and prospects Front Immunol 2022 13 835762 10.3389/fimmu.2022.835762 35309357 PMC8928448

106. Chandran SS Klebanoff CA T cell receptor-based cancer immunotherapy: Emerging efficacy and pathways of resistance Immunol Rev 2019 290 1 127 147 10.1111/imr.12772 31355495 PMC7027847

107. Hsu R Baca Y Xiu J Wang R Bodor JN Kim C Molecular characterization of Kita-Kyushu lung cancer antigen (KK-LC-1) expressing carcinomas Oncotarget 2021 12 25 2449 2458 10.18632/oncotarget.28132 34917263 PMC8664394

108. Leidner R Sanjuan Silva N Huang H Sprott D Zheng C Shih Y-P Neoantigen T-cell receptor gene therapy in pancreatic cancer N Engl J Med 2022 386 22 2112 2119 10.1056/NEJMoa2119662 35648703 PMC9531755

109. Gao G Liao W Ma Q Zhang B Chen Y Wang Y KRAS G12D mutation predicts lower TMB and drives immune suppression in lung adenocarcinoma Lung Cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 2020 149 41 45 10.1016/j.lungcan.2020.09.004 32956987

110. Kankeu Fonkoua LA Sirpilla O Sakemura R Siegler EL Kenderian SS CAR T cell therapy and the tumor microenvironment: Current challenges and opportunities Mol Ther - Oncolytics 2022 25 69 77 10.1016/j.omto.2022.03.009 35434273 PMC8980704

111. Rath JA Arber C Engineering strategies to enhance TCR-based adoptive T cell therapy Cells 2020 9 6 1485 10.3390/cells9061485 32570906 PMC7349724

112. Zhao Q Jiang Y Xiang S Kaboli PJ Shen J Zhao Y Engineered TCR-T cell immunotherapy in anticancer precision medicine: pros and cons Front Immunol 2021 12 658753 10.3389/fimmu.2021.658753 33859650 PMC8042275

113. He Q Jiang X Zhou X Weng J Targeting cancers through TCR-peptide/MHC interactions J Hematol Oncol 2019 12 1 139 10.1186/s13045-019-0812-8 31852498 PMC6921533

114. Ben Khelil M Godet Y Abdeljaoued S Borg C Adotévi O Loyon R Harnessing antitumor CD4+ T cells for cancer immunotherapy Cancers 2022 14 1 260 10.3390/cancers14010260 35008422 PMC8750687

115. Veatch JR Simon S Riddell SR Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes make inroads in non–small-cell lung cancer Nat Med 2021 27 8 1339 1341 10.1038/s41591-021-01445-z 34385706

116 Wang S Sun J Chen K Ma P Lei Q Xing S Perspectives of tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte treatment in solid tumors BMC Med 2021 19 1 140 10.1186/s12916-021-02006-4 34112147 PMC8194199

117. Ratto GB Zino P Mirabelli S Minuti P Aquilina R Fantino G A randomized trial of adoptive immunotherapy with tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and interleukin-2 versus standard therapy in the postoperative treatment of resected nonsmall cell lung carcinoma Cancer 1996 78 2 244 251 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960715)78:2<244::AID-CNCR9>3.0.CO;2-L 8673999

118. Creelan B WC, Teer J, et al., editor Durable complete responses to adoptive cell transfer using tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): a phase I trial. AACR Virtual Annual Meeting I; 2020 April 27-28, 2020. https://www.cancer.org/cancer-facts-and-figures-2015.pdf

119. Fang L Ly D Wang S-s Lee JB Kang H Xu H Targeting late-stage non-small cell lung cancer with a combination of DNT cellular therapy and PD-1 checkpoint blockade J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2019 38 1 123 10.1186/s13046-019-1126-y 30857561 PMC6413451

120. Creelan BC Wang C Teer JK Toloza EM Yao J Kim S Tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte treatment for anti-PD-1-resistant metastatic lung cancer: a phase 1 trial Nat Med 2021 27 8 1410 1418 10.1038/s41591-021-01462-y 34385708 PMC8509078

121. Ben-Avi R Farhi R Ben-Nun A Gorodner M Greenberg E Markel G Establishment of adoptive cell therapy with tumor infiltrating lymphocytes for non-small cell lung cancer patients Cancer Immunol Immunother : CII 2018 67 8 1221 1230 10.1007/s00262-018-2174-4 29845338 PMC11028292

122. Santos Apolonio J Lima de Souza Gonçalves V Cordeiro Santos ML Silva Luz M Silva Souza JV Rocha Pinheiro SL Oncolytic virus therapy in cancer: a current review World J Virol 2021 10 5 229 55 10.5501/wjv.v10.i5.229 34631474 PMC8474975

123. Russell SJ Peng K-W Bell JC Oncolytic virotherapy Nat Biotechnol 2012 30 7 658 670 10.1038/nbt.2287 22781695 PMC3888062

124. Vinay DS Ryan EP Pawelec G Talib WH Stagg J Elkord E Immune evasion in cancer: Mechanistic basis and therapeutic strategies Semin Cancer Biol 2015 35 S185 S198 10.1016/j.semcancer.2015.03.004 25818339

125 Hemminki O dos Santos JM Hemminki A Oncolytic viruses for cancer immunotherapy J Hematol Oncol 2020 13 1 84 10.1186/s13045-020-00922-1 32600470 PMC7325106

126. Zhang Y Li Y Chen K Qian L Wang P Oncolytic virotherapy reverses the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment and its potential in combination with immunotherapy Cancer Cell Int 2021 21 1 262 10.1186/s12935-021-01972-2 33985527 PMC8120729

127. Rosewell Shaw A Suzuki M Oncolytic viruses partner with T-cell therapy for solid tumor treatment Front Immunol 2018 9 2103 10.3389/fimmu.2018.02103 30298067 PMC6160535

128. Lawler SE Speranza M-C Cho C-F Chiocca EA Oncolytic viruses in cancer treatment JAMA Oncol 2017 3 6 841 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.2064 27441411

129. Hernandez FP Sandri-Goldin RM Herpes simplex virus 1 regulatory protein ICP27 undergoes a head-to-tail intramolecular interaction J Virol 2010 84 9 4124 4135 10.1128/JVI.02319-09 PMC2863791 20164236

130. Li J-M Kao K-C Li L-F Yang T-M Wu C-P Horng Y-M MicroRNA-145 regulates oncolytic herpes simplex virus-1 for selective killing of human non-small cell lung cancer cells Virology J 2013 10 1 241 10.1186/1743-422X-10-241 23876001 PMC3734208

131. Galluzzi L Vitale I Warren S Adjemian S Agostinis P Martinez AB Consensus guidelines for the definition, detection and interpretation of immunogenic cell death J ImmunoTher Cancer 2020 8 1 e000337 10.1136/jitc-2019-000337 32209603 PMC7064135

132. Miyamoto S Inoue H Nakamura T Yamada M Sakamoto C Urata Y Coxsackievirus B3 Is an oncolytic virus with immunostimulatory properties that is active against lung adenocarcinoma Can Res 2012 72 10 2609 2621 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-3185 22461509

133. McCart JA Ward JM Lee J Hu Y Alexander HR Libutti SK Systemic cancer therapy with a tumor-selective vaccinia virus mutant lacking thymidine kinase and vaccinia growth factor genes Can Res 2001 61 24 8751 8757 11751395

134. Guo ZS Thorne SH Bartlett DL Oncolytic virotherapy: Molecular targets in tumor-selective replication and carrier cell-mediated delivery of oncolytic viruses Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) Rev Cancer 2008 1785 2 217 31 10.1016/j.bbcan.2008.02.001 PMC2888475 18328829

135. Guo ZS Lu B Guo Z Giehl E Feist M Dai E Vaccinia virus-mediated cancer immunotherapy: cancer vaccines and oncolytics J ImmunoTher Cancer 2019 7 1 6 10.1186/s40425-018-0495-7 30626434 PMC6325819

136. Niemann J Kühnel F Oncolytic viruses: adenoviruses Virus Genes 2017 53 5 700 706 10.1007/s11262-017-1488-1 28702840

137. Guan Y-s Liu Y Zou Q He Q La Z Yang L Adenovirus-mediated wild-type p53 gene transfer in combination with bronchial arterial infusion for treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, one year follow-up J Zhejiang Univ SCIENCE B 2009 10 5 331 40 10.1631/jzus.B0820248 19434759 PMC2676412

138. Reddy PS Burroughs KD Hales LM Ganesh S Jones BH Idamakanti N Seneca Valley virus, a systemically deliverable oncolytic picornavirus, and the treatment of neuroendocrine cancers JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 2007 99 21 1623 33 10.1093/jnci/djm198 17971529 PMC5261858

139. Rudin CM Poirier JT Senzer NN Stephenson J Loesch D Burroughs KD Phase I Clinical Study of Seneca Valley Virus (SVV-001), a replication-competent picornavirus, in advanced solid tumors with neuroendocrine features Clin Cancer Res 2011 17 4 888 895 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1706 21304001 PMC5317273

140. Schenk EL Mandrekar SJ Dy GK Aubry MC Tan AD Dakhil SR A Randomized double-blind phase II study of the seneca valley virus (NTX-010) versus placebo for patients with extensive-stage SCLC (ES SCLC) who were stable or responding after at least four cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy: north central cancer treatment group (Alliance) N0923 study J Thorac Oncol 2020 15 1 110 119 10.1016/j.jtho.2019.09.083 31605793 PMC7279615

141. Santini D Hilbe W Pall G Kocher F Pircher A Zabernigg A Multicenter phase II study evaluating two cycles of docetaxel cisplatin and cetuximab as induction regimen prior to surgery in chemotherapy-naive patients with NSCLC stage IB-IIIA (INN06-Study PloS one 2015 10 5 0125364 10.1371/journal.pone.0125364 PMC4447267 26020783

142. Díaz-Serrano A Sánchez-Torre A Paz-Ares L Necitumumab for the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer Future Oncol 2019 15 7 705 716 10.2217/fon-2018-0594 30501503

143. Yamamoto N Harada H Okamoto I Masuda N Hayakawa K Satouchi M Phase 2 study of nimotuzumab in combination with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with locally advanced non–small-cell lung cancer Clin Lung Cancer 2021 22 2 134 141 10.1016/j.cllc.2020.12.012 33518480

144 Arcangelo M Cappuzzo F Focus on the potential role of ficlatuzumab in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer Biologics Targets Ther 2013 7 61 10.2147/BTT.S28908 PMC3593708 23493885

145. Garon EB Ciuleanu T-E Arrieta O Prabhash K Syrigos KN Goksel T Ramucirumab plus docetaxel versus placebo plus docetaxel for second-line treatment of stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on platinum-based therapy (REVEL): a multicentre, double-blind, randomised phase 3 trial The Lancet 2014 384 9944 665 673 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60845-X 24933332

146. Scagliotti GV Hirsh V Siena S Henry DH Woll PJ Manegold C Overall survival improvement in patients with lung cancer and bone metastases treated with denosumab versus zoledronic acid: subgroup analysis from a randomized phase 3 study J Thorac Oncol 2012 7 12 1823 1829 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31826aec2b 23154554

147. Langer CJ Novello S Park K Krzakowski M Karp DD Mok T Randomized, phase III trial of first-line Figitumumab in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin versus paclitaxel and carboplatin alone in patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer J Clin Oncol 2014 32 19 2059 2066 10.1200/JCO.2013.54.4932 24888810 PMC4067944

148. Yen W-C Fischer MM Axelrod F Bond C Cain J Cancilla B Targeting notch signaling with a Notch2/Notch3 antagonist (Tarextumab) inhibits tumor growth and decreases tumor-initiating cell frequency Clin Cancer Res 2015 21 9 2084 2095 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-2808 25934888

149. Gladkov O Ramlau R Serwatowski P Milanowski J Tomeczko J Komarnitsky PB Cyclophosphamide and tucotuzumab (huKS-IL2) following first-line chemotherapy in responding patients with extensive-disease small-cell lung cancer Anticancer Drugs 2015 26 10 1061 1068 10.1097/CAD.0000000000000281 26295868

150. Bottomley A Debruyne C Felip E Millward M Thiberville L Addario GD Symptom and quality of life results of an international randomised phase III study of adjuvant vaccination with Bec2/BCG in responding patients with limited disease small-cell lung cancer Eur J Cancer 2008 44 15 2178 2184 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.06.036 18676140

151. Mukherjee A Waters AK Babic I Nurmemmedov E Glassy MC Kesari S Antibody drug conjugates: progress, pitfalls, and promises Hum Antibodies 2018 27 1 53 62 10.3233/HAB-180348 30223393

152. Morgensztern D Besse B Greillier L Santana-Davila R Ready N Hann CL Efficacy and safety of rovalpituzumab tesirine in third-line and beyond patients with DLL3-Expressing, relapsed/refractory small-cell lung cancer: results from the phase II trinity study Clin Cancer Res 2019 25 23 6958 6966 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-1133 31506387 PMC7105795

153. Gray JE Heist RS Starodub AN Camidge DR Kio EA Masters GA Therapy of Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC) with a topoisomerase-I–inhibiting Antibody-Drug Conjugate (ADC) targeting trop-2 Sacituzumab Govitecan Clin Cancer Res 2017 23 19 5711 5719 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-0933 28679770

154. Shah MH Lorigan P O’Brien MER Fossella FV Moore KN Bhatia S Phase I study of IMGN901, a CD56-targeting antibody-drug conjugate, in patients with CD56-positive solid tumors Invest New Drugs 2016 34 3 290 299 10.1007/s10637-016-0336-9 26961907 PMC4859861

155. Hann CL Burns TF Dowlati A Morgensztern D Ward PJ Koch MM A phase 1 study evaluating rovalpituzumab tesirine in frontline treatment of patients with extensive-stage SCLC J Thorac Oncol 2021 16 9 1582 1588 10.1016/j.jtho.2021.06.022 34242790

156. Hotta K Aoe K Kozuki T Ohashi K Ninomiya K Ichihara E A phase II study of trastuzumab emtansine in HER2-positive non-small cell lung cancer J Thorac Oncol 2018 13 2 273 279 10.1016/j.jtho.2017.10.032 29313813

157. Waqar SN Redman MW Arnold SM Hirsch FR Mack PC Schwartz LH A phase II study of Telisotuzumab Vedotin in patients with c–MET-positive stage IV or recurrent squamous cell lung cancer (LUNG-MAP sub-study S1400K, NCT03574753 ) Clin Lung Cancer 2021 22 3 170 177 10.1016/j.cllc.2020.09.013 33221175 PMC8044254

158 Koopman LA Terp MG Zom GG Janmaat ML Jacobsen K van den Heuvel Gresnigt E Enapotamab vedotin, an AXL-specific antibody-drug conjugate, shows preclinical antitumor activity in non-small cell lung cancer JCI Insight. 2019 4 21 e128199 10.1172/jci.insight.128199 31600169 PMC6948776

159. Park K Haura EB Leighl NB Mitchell P Shu CA Girard N Amivantamab in EGFR Exon 20 insertion-mutated non–small-cell lung cancer progressing on platinum chemotherapy: initial results from the CHRYSALIS phase I study J Clin Oncol 2021 39 30 3391 3402 10.1200/JCO.21.00662 34339292 PMC8791812

160. Peggs KS Quezada SA Chambers CA Korman AJ Allison JP Blockade of CTLA-4 on both effector and regulatory T cell compartments contributes to the antitumor activity of anti-CTLA-4 antibodies J Exp Med 2009 206 8 1717 1725 10.1084/jem.20082492 19581407 PMC2722174

161. Tomasini P Khobta N Greillier L Barlesi F Ipilimumab: its potential in non-small cell lung cancer Ther Adv Med Oncol 2012 4 2 43 50 10.1177/1758834011431718 22423263 PMC3296082

162. Lynch TJ Bondarenko I Luft A Serwatowski P Barlesi F Chacko R Ipilimumab in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin as first-line treatment in stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer: results from a randomized, double-blind, multicenter phase II study J Clin Oncol 2012 30 17 2046 2054 10.1200/JCO.2011.38.4032 22547592

163. Chalmers AW Patel S Boucher K Cannon L Esplin M Luckart J Phase I trial of targeted EGFR or ALK therapy with ipilimumab in metastatic NSCLC with long-term follow-up Target Oncol 2019 14 4 417 421 10.1007/s11523-019-00658-0 31346927

164. Zatloukal P Heo DS Park K Kang J Butts C Bradford D Randomized phase II clinical trial comparing tremelimumab (CP-675,206) with best supportive care (BSC) following first-line platinum-based therapy in patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) J Clin Oncol 2009 27 15_suppl 8071 10.1200/jco.2009.27.15_suppl.8071

165. Rizvi NA Mazières J Planchard D Stinchcombe TE Dy GK Antonia SJ Activity and safety of nivolumab, an anti-PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor, for patients with advanced, refractory squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 063): a phase 2, single-arm trial Lancet Oncol 2015 16 3 257 265 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)70054-9 25704439 PMC5726228

166. Borghaei H Paz-Ares L Horn L Spigel DR Steins M Ready NE Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in advanced Nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer N Engl J Med 2015 373 17 1627 1639 10.1056/NEJMoa1507643 26412456 PMC5705936

167. Brahmer J Reckamp KL Baas P Crinò L Eberhardt WEE Poddubskaya E Nivolumab versus Docetaxel in advanced squamous-cell non–small-cell lung cancer N Engl J Med 2015 373 2 123 135 10.1056/NEJMoa1504627 26028407 PMC4681400

168. Gettinger S Rizvi NA Chow LQ Borghaei H Brahmer J Ready N Nivolumab monotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer J Clin Oncol 2016 34 25 2980 2987 10.1200/JCO.2016.66.9929 27354485 PMC5569692

169. Hellmann MD Paz-Ares L Bernabe Caro R Zurawski B Kim SW Carcereny Costa E Nivolumab plus Ipilimumab in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer N Engl J Med 2019 381 21 2020 2031 10.1056/NEJMoa1910231 31562796

170. Deng H Zhou C From CheckMate 227 to CheckMate 9LA: rethinking the status of chemotherapy in the immunotherapy era—chemo-free or chemo-reform? Transl Lung Cancer Res 2021 10 4 1924 1927 10.21037/tlcr-21-179 34012802 PMC8107757

171. Paz-Ares L Ciuleanu T-E Cobo M Schenker M Zurawski B Menezes J First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab combined with two cycles of chemotherapy in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 9LA): an international, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol 2021 22 2 198 211 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30641-0 33476593

172. Chatterjee M Turner DC Felip E Lena H Cappuzzo F Horn L Systematic evaluation of pembrolizumab dosing in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer Ann Oncol 2016 27 7 1291 1298 10.1093/annonc/mdw174 27117531 PMC6276906

173. Garon EB Rizvi NA Hui R Leighl N Balmanoukian AS Eder JP Pembrolizumab for the treatment of non–small-cell lung cancer N Engl J Med 2015 372 21 2018 2028 10.1056/NEJMoa1501824 25891174

174. Reck M Rodríguez-Abreu D Robinson AG Hui R Csőszi T Fülöp A Pembrolizumab versus Chemotherapy for PD-L1–Positive non–small-cell lung cancer N Engl J Med 2016 375 19 1823 1833 10.1056/NEJMoa1606774 27718847

175. Antonia SJ Kim S-W Spira AI Ahn MJ Ou S-HI Stjepanovic N Safety and clinical activity of durvalumab (MEDI4736), an anti-PD-L1 antibody, in treatment-naïve patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer J Clin Oncol 2016 34 15_suppl 9029 10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.9029

176. Antonia SJ Goldberg SB Balmanoukian A Chaft JE Sanborn RE Gupta A Safety and antitumour activity of durvalumab plus tremelimumab in non-small cell lung cancer: a multicentre, phase 1b study Lancet Oncol 2016 17 3 299 308 10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00544-6 26858122 PMC5500167

177. Peters S Gettinger S Johnson ML Jänne PA Garassino MC Christoph D Phase II trial of Atezolizumab as first-line or subsequent therapy for patients with programmed death-ligand 1-selected advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (BIRCH) J Clin Oncol 2017 35 24 2781 2789 10.1200/JCO.2016.71.9476 28609226 PMC5562171

178. Herbst RS Soria J-C Kowanetz M Fine GD Hamid O Gordon MS Predictive correlates of response to the anti-PD-L1 antibody MPDL3280A in cancer patients Nature 2014 515 7528 563 567 10.1038/nature14011 25428504 PMC4836193

179. Fehrenbacher L Spira A Ballinger M Kowanetz M Vansteenkiste J Mazieres J Atezolizumab versus docetaxel for patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (POPLAR): a multicentre, open-label, phase 2 randomised controlled trial Lancet (London, England) 2016 387 10030 1837 1846 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)00587-0 26970723

180. Verschraegen CF Chen F Spigel DR Iannotti N McClay EF Redfern CH Avelumab (MSB0010718C; anti-PD-L1) as a first-line treatment for patients with advanced NSCLC from the JAVELIN Solid Tumor phase 1b trial: Safety, clinical activity, and PD-L1 expression J Clin Oncol 2016 34 15_suppl 9036 10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.9036

181 Rotte A Sahasranaman S Budha N Targeting TIGIT for immunotherapy of cancer: update on clinical development Biomedicines 2021 9 9 1277 10.3390/biomedicines9091277 34572463 PMC8472042

182 Shan C Li X Zhang J Progress of immune checkpoint LAG-3 in immunotherapy (Review) Oncol Lett 2020 20 5 1 10.3892/ol.2020.12070 32963613 PMC7491111

183. Felip E Doger B Majem M Carcereny E Krebs M Peguero JA Initial results from a phase II study (TACTI-002) in metastatic non-small cell lung or head and neck carcinoma patients receiving eftilagimod alpha (soluble LAG-3 protein) and pembrolizumab J Clin Oncol 2020 38 15 3100 10.1200/JCO.2020.38.15_suppl.3100

184. Sun R Limkin EJ Vakalopoulou M Dercle L Champiat S Han SR A radiomics approach to assess tumour-infiltrating CD8 cells and response to anti-PD-1 or anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy: an imaging biomarker, retrospective multicohort study Lancet Oncol 2018 19 9 1180 1191 10.1016/S1470-2045(18)30413-3 30120041

185. Xu Z Wang X Zeng S Ren X Yan Y Gong Z Applying artificial intelligence for cancer immunotherapy Acta Pharmaceutica Sinica B 2021 11 11 3393 3405 10.1016/j.apsb.2021.02.007 34900525 PMC8642413

186. Travis WD. Update on small cell carcinoma and its differentiation from squamous cell carcinoma and other non-small cell carcinomas. Mod Pathol. 2012;25 Suppl 1:S18–30. 10.1038/modpathol.2011.150. 10.1038/modpathol.2011.150 22214967

187. Travis WDB, E; Müller-Hermelink, H.K.; et al. Pathology and Genetics: Tumours of the Lung, Pleura, Thymus and Heart. IARC: Lyon. 2004;1.

188. Azzopardi JG Oat-cell carcinoma of the bronchus J Pathol Bacteriol 1959 78 513 519 10.1002/path.1700780218 13795444

189. Nicholson SA Beasley MB Brambilla E Hasleton PS Colby TV Sheppard MN Small cell lung carcinoma (SCLC): a clinicopathologic study of 100 cases with surgical specimens Am J Surg Pathol 2002 26 9 1184 1197 10.1097/00000478-200209000-00009 12218575

190. Travis WD Advances in neuroendocrine lung tumors Ann Oncol 2010 21 Suppl-7 vii65 71 10.1093/annonc/mdq380 20943645

191. Fruh M De Ruysscher D Popat S Crino L Peters S Felip E Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up Ann Oncol J Eur Soc Med Oncol 2013 24 6 99 105 10.1093/annonc/mdt178 23813929

192. Herbst RS Heymach JV Lippman SM Lung cancer N Engl J Med 2008 359 13 1367 1380 10.1056/NEJMra0802714 18815398 PMC10662965

193. Johnson BE Crawford J Downey RJ Ettinger DS Fossella F Grecula JC Small cell lung cancer clinical practice guidelines in oncology J Natl Compr Cancer Network 2006 4 6 602 622 10.6004/jnccn.2006.0050 16813728

194. Rudin CM Ismaila N Hann CL Malhotra N Movsas B Norris K Treatment of small-cell lung cancer: American society of clinical oncology endorsement of the american college of chest physicians guideline J Clin Oncol 2015 33 34 4106 4111 10.1200/JCO.2015.63.7918 26351333

195. Chan BA Coward JI Chemotherapy advances in small-cell lung cancer J Thorac Dis 2013 5 Suppl 5 S565 S578 24163749 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2013.07.43 PMC3804877

196. Simon GR Turrisi A Management of small cell lung cancer: ACCP evidence-based clinical practice guidelines (2nd edition) Chest 2007 132 3 Suppl 324s 39s 10.1378/chest.07-1385 17873178

197. Lally BE Urbanic JJ Blackstock AW Miller AA Perry MC Small cell lung cancer: have we made any progress over the last 25 years? Oncologist 2007 12 9 1096 1104 10.1634/theoncologist.12-9-1096 17914079

198. George J Lim JS Jang SJ Cun Y Ozretic L Kong G Comprehensive genomic profiles of small cell lung cancer Nature 2015 524 7563 47 53 10.1038/nature14664 26168399 PMC4861069

199. Horn L Reck M Spigel DR The future of immunotherapy in the treatment of small cell lung cancer Oncologist 2016 21 8 910 921 10.1634/theoncologist.2015-0523 27354668 PMC4978554

200 Rizvi NA Hellmann MD Snyder A Kvistborg P Makarov V Havel JJ Cancer immunology. Mutational landscape determines sensitivity to PD-1 blockade in non-small cell lung cancer Science (New York, NY) 2015 348 6230 124 8 10.1126/science.aaa1348 PMC4993154 25765070

201. Darnell RB Onconeural antigens and the paraneoplastic neurologic disorders: at the intersection of cancer, immunity, and the brain Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1996 93 10 4529 4536 10.1073/pnas.93.10.4529 8643438 PMC39311

202. Koyama K Kagamu H Miura S Hiura T Miyabayashi T Itoh R Reciprocal CD4+ T-cell balance of effector CD62Llow CD4+ and CD62LhighCD25+ CD4+ regulatory T cells in small cell lung cancer reflects disease stage Clin Cancer Res 2008 14 21 6770 6779 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-1156 18980970

203. Maddison P Newsom-Davis J Mills KR Souhami RL Favourable prognosis in Lambert-Eaton myasthenic syndrome and small-cell lung carcinoma Lancet (London, England) 1999 353 9147 117 118 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)76153-5 10023900

204. Tani T Tanaka K Idezuka J Nishizawa M Regulatory T cells in paraneoplastic neurological syndromes J Neuroimmunol 2008 196 1–2 166 169 10.1016/j.jneuroim.2008.03.002 18455243

205. Wang W Hodkinson P McLaren F Mackean MJ Williams L Howie SEM Histologic assessment of tumor-associated CD45(+) cell numbers is an independent predictor of prognosis in small cell lung cancer Chest 2013 143 1 146 151 10.1378/chest.12-0681 22847040

206. Krug LM Vaccine therapy for small cell lung cancer Semin Oncol 2004 31 1 Suppl 1 112 116 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2003.12.022 14981589

207. Livingston PO Calves MJ Jr. Natoli EJ Approaches to augmenting the immunogenicity of the ganglioside GM2 in mice purified GM2 is superior to whole cells J Immunol (Baltimore Md :1950) 1987 138 5 1524 9 10.4049/jimmunol.138.5.1524 3805726

208. Fuentes R Allman R Mason MD Ganglioside expression in lung cancer cell lines Lung Cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 1997 18 1 21 33 10.1016/S0169-5002(97)00049-4 9268945

209. McCaffery M Yao TJ Williams L Livingston PO Houghton AN Chapman PB Immunization of melanoma patients with BEC2 anti-idiotypic monoclonal antibody that mimics GD3 ganglioside: enhanced immunogenicity when combined with adjuvant Clin Cancer Res 1996 2 4 679 686 9816218

210 Zhang S Cordon-Cardo C Zhang HS Reuter VE Adluri S Hamilton WB Selection of tumor antigens as targets for immune attack using immunohistochemistry: I. Focus on gangliosides Int J Cancer 1997 73 1 42 9 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19970926)73:1<42::AID-IJC8>3.0.CO;2-1 9334808

211. Dickler MN Ragupathi G Liu NX Musselli C Martino DJ Miller VA Immunogenicity of a fucosyl-GM1-keyhole limpet hemocyanin conjugate vaccine in patients with small cell lung cancer Clin Cancer Res 1999 5 10 2773 2779 10537341

212. Gilewski T Ragupathi G Bhuta S Williams LJ Musselli C Zhang XF Immunization of metastatic breast cancer patients with a fully synthetic globo H conjugate: a phase I trial Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001 98 6 3270 3275 10.1073/pnas.051626298 11248068 PMC30643

213. Helling F Zhang S Shang A Adluri S Calves M Koganty R GM2-KLH conjugate vaccine: increased immunogenicity in melanoma patients after administration with immunological adjuvant QS-21 Can Res 1995 55 13 2783 2788 7796403

214. Krug LM Ragupathi G Ng KK Hood C Jennings HJ Guo Z Vaccination of small cell lung cancer patients with polysialic acid or N-propionylated polysialic acid conjugated to keyhole limpet hemocyanin Clin Cancer Res 2004 10 3 916 923 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-03-0101 14871967

215. Slovin SF Ragupathi G Adluri S Ungers G Terry K Kim S Carbohydrate vaccines in cancer: immunogenicity of a fully synthetic globo H hexasaccharide conjugate in man Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1999 96 10 5710 5715 10.1073/pnas.96.10.5710 10318949 PMC21925

216. Chiappori AA Soliman H Janssen WE Antonia SJ Gabrilovich DI INGN-225: a dendritic cell-based p53 vaccine (Ad.p53-DC) in small cell lung cancer: observed association between immune response and enhanced chemotherapy effect Expert Opin Biol Ther 2010 10 6 983 91 10.1517/14712598.2010.484801 20420527 PMC3146364

217. Antonia SJ Mirza N Fricke I Chiappori A Thompson P Williams N Combination of p53 cancer vaccine with chemotherapy in patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer Clin Cancer Res 2006 12 3 Pt 1 878 887 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-2013 16467102

218. Sakamoto S Yamada T Terazaki Y Yoshiyama K Sugawara S Takamori S Feasibility study of personalized peptide vaccination for advanced small cell lung cancer Clin Lung Cancer 2017 18 6 e385 e394 10.1016/j.cllc.2017.03.011 28416261

219. Pardoll DM The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy Nat Rev Cancer 2012 12 4 252 264 10.1038/nrc3239 22437870 PMC4856023

220. Mellman I Coukos G Dranoff G Cancer immunotherapy comes of age Nature 2011 480 7378 480 489 10.1038/nature10673 22193102 PMC3967235

221. Asmar R Rizvi NA Immunotherapy for advanced lung cancer The Cancer J 2015 21 5 383 391 10.1097/PPO.0000000000000151 26389763

222. Yamane H Isozaki H Takeyama M Ochi N Kudo K Honda Y Programmed cell death protein 1 and programmed death-ligand 1 are expressed on the surface of some small-cell lung cancer lines Am J Cancer Res 2015 5 4 1553 1557 26101718 PMC4473331

223. Ott PA Elez E Hiret S Kim DW Morosky A Saraf S Pembrolizumab in patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer: results from the phase Ib KEYNOTE-028 Study J Clin Oncol 2017 35 34 3823 3829 10.1200/JCO.2017.72.5069 28813164

224. Ishii H Azuma K Kawahara A Yamada K Imamura Y Tokito T Significance of programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression and its association with survival in patients with small cell lung cancer J Thorac Oncol 2015 10 3 426 430 10.1097/JTO.0000000000000414 25384063

225. Salama AK Hodi FS Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen-4 Clin Cancer Res 2011 17 14 4622 4628 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-2232 21467163

226. Reck M Bondarenko I Luft A Serwatowski P Barlesi F Chacko R Ipilimumab in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin as first-line therapy in extensive-disease-small-cell lung cancer: results from a randomized, double-blind, multicenter phase 2 trial Ann Oncol 2013 24 1 75 83 10.1093/annonc/mds213 22858559

227. Antonia SJ López-Martin JA Bendell J Ott PA Taylor M Eder JP Nivolumab alone and nivolumab plus ipilimumab in recurrent small-cell lung cancer (CheckMate 032): a multicentre, open-label, phase 1/2 trial Lancet Oncol 2016 17 7 883 895 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30098-5 27269741

228. De Palma M Biziato D Petrova TV Microenvironmental regulation of tumour angiogenesis Nat Rev Cancer 2017 17 8 457 474 10.1038/nrc.2017.51 28706266

229. Hall RD Le TM Haggstrom DE Gentzler RD Angiogenesis inhibition as a therapeutic strategy in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) Transl Lung Cancer Res 2015 4 5 515 523 26629420 10.3978/j.issn.2218-6751.2015.06.09 PMC4630516

230. Ohm JE Gabrilovich DI Sempowski GD Kisseleva E Parman KS Nadaf S VEGF inhibits T-cell development and may contribute to tumor-induced immune suppression Blood 2003 101 12 4878 4886 10.1182/blood-2002-07-1956 12586633

231. Ohm JE Carbone DP VEGF as a mediator of tumor-associated immunodeficiency Immunol Res 2001 23 2–3 263 272 10.1385/IR:23:2-3:263 11444391

232. Bouzin C Brouet A De Vriese J Dewever J Feron O Effects of vascular endothelial growth factor on the lymphocyte-endothelium interactions: identification of caveolin-1 and nitric oxide as control points of endothelial cell anergy J Immunol (Baltimore, Md : 1950) 2007 178 3 1505 11 10.4049/jimmunol.178.3.1505 17237399

233. Motz GT Santoro SP Wang LP Garrabrant T Lastra RR Hagemann IS Tumor endothelium FasL establishes a selective immune barrier promoting tolerance in tumors Nat Med 2014 20 6 607 615 10.1038/nm.3541 24793239 PMC4060245

234. Terme M Pernot S Marcheteau E Sandoval F Benhamouda N Colussi O VEGFA-VEGFR pathway blockade inhibits tumor-induced regulatory T-cell proliferation in colorectal cancer Can Res 2013 73 2 539 549 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-2325 23108136

235. Tong RT Boucher Y Kozin SV Winkler F Hicklin DJ Jain RK Vascular normalization by vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 blockade induces a pressure gradient across the vasculature and improves drug penetration in tumors Can Res 2004 64 11 3731 3736 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-0074 15172975

236. Wu JB Tang YL Liang XH Targeting VEGF pathway to normalize the vasculature: an emerging insight in cancer therapy Onco Targets Ther 2018 11 6901 6909 10.2147/OTT.S172042 30410348 PMC6200071

237. Bonanno L De Paoli A Zulato E Esposito G Calabrese F Favaretto A LKB1 expression correlates with increased survival in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy and Bevacizumab Clin Cancer Res 2017 23 13 3316 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-2410 28119362

238. Manegold C Dingemans AC Gray JE Nakagawa K Nicolson M Peters S The Potential of Combined Immunotherapy and Antiangiogenesis for the Synergistic Treatment of Advanced NSCLC J Thorac Oncol 2017 12 2 194 207 10.1016/j.jtho.2016.10.003 27729297

239. Tao L Huang G Shi S Chen L Bevacizumab improves the antitumor efficacy of adoptive cytokine-induced killer cells therapy in non-small cell lung cancer models Med Oncol (Northwood, London, England) 2014 31 1 777 10.1007/s12032-013-0777-3 24271420

240. Liang H Wang M Prospect of immunotherapy combined with anti-angiogenic agents in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer Cancer Manag Res 2019 11 7707 7719 10.2147/CMAR.S212238 31616186 PMC6699593

241. Yi M Jiao D Qin S Chu Q Wu K Li A Synergistic effect of immune checkpoint blockade and anti-angiogenesis in cancer treatment Mol Cancer 2019 18 1 60 10.1186/s12943-019-0974-6 30925919 PMC6441150

242 Gadgeel SM Stevenson J Langer CJ Gandhi L Borghaei H Patnaik A Pembrolizumab (pembro) plus chemotherapy as front-line therapy for advanced NSCLC: KEYNOTE-021 cohorts A-C J Clin Oncol 2016 34 15_suppl 9016 10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.9016

243. NCCN Clinical practice guideline in oncology (NCCN Guidelines). Non Small cell Lung Cancer. 2020. https://www.cancer.org/cancer-facts-and-figures-2015.pdf

244. Gandhi L Rodríguez-Abreu D Gadgeel S Esteban E Felip E De Angelis F Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer N Engl J Med 2018 378 22 2078 2092 10.1056/NEJMoa1801005 29658856

245. Paz-Ares L Luft A Vicente D Tafreshi A Gümüş M Mazières J Pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy for squamous non-small-cell lung cancer N Engl J Med 2018 379 21 2040 2051 10.1056/NEJMoa1810865 30280635

246. Herbst RS Baas P Kim DW Felip E Pérez-Gracia JL Han JY Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel for previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-010): a randomised controlled trial Lancet (London, England) 2016 387 10027 1540 1550 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)01281-7 26712084

247. Socinski MA Jotte RM Cappuzzo F Orlandi F Stroyakovskiy D Nogami N Atezolizumab for first-line treatment of metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC N Engl J Med 2018 378 24 2288 2301 10.1056/NEJMoa1716948 29863955

248. Reck M Mok TSK Nishio M Jotte RM Cappuzzo F Orlandi F Atezolizumab plus bevacizumab and chemotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer (IMpower150): key subgroup analyses of patients with EGFR mutations or baseline liver metastases in a randomised, open-label phase 3 trial Lancet Respir Med 2019 7 5 387 401 10.1016/S2213-2600(19)30084-0 30922878

249. Rittmeyer A Barlesi F Waterkamp D Park K Ciardiello F von Pawel J Atezolizumab versus docetaxel in patients with previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer (OAK): a phase 3, open-label, multicentre randomised controlled trial Lancet (London, England) 2017 389 10066 255 265 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32517-X 27979383 PMC6886121

250. F. Barlesi KP, F. Ciardiello, J. von Pawel, S. Gadgeel, T. Hida, D. Kowalski, M. Cobo Dols, D. Cortinovis, J. Leach, J. Polikoff, D.R. Gandara, C. Barrios, D.S. Chen, P. He, M. Kowanetz, M. Ballinger, D. Waterkamp, A. Sandler, A. Rittmeyer, editor PRIMARY ANALYSIS FROM OAK, A RANDOMIZED PHASE III STUDY COMPARING ATEZOLIZUMAB WITH DOCETAXEL IN 2L/3L NSCLC. Annals of Oncology; 2016.

251. Antonia SJ Villegas A Daniel D Vicente D Murakami S Hui R Overall survival with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in stage III NSCLC N Engl J Med 2018 379 24 2342 2350 10.1056/NEJMoa1809697 30280658

252. Horn L Mansfield AS Szczęsna A Havel L Krzakowski M Hochmair MJ First-line atezolizumab plus chemotherapy in extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer N Engl J Med 2018 379 23 2220 2229 10.1056/NEJMoa1809064 30280641

253. Liu SV Reck M Mansfield AS Mok T Scherpereel A Reinmuth N Updated overall survival and PD-L1 subgroup analysis of patients with extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer treated with atezolizumab, carboplatin, and etoposide (IMpower133) J Clin Oncol 2021 39 6 619 630 10.1200/JCO.20.01055 33439693 PMC8078320

254. Paz-Ares L Dvorkin M Chen Y Reinmuth N Hotta K Trukhin D Durvalumab plus platinum–etoposide versus platinum–etoposide in first-line treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (CASPIAN): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial The Lancet 2019 394 10212 1929 1939 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32222-6 31590988

255. Chung HC Piha-Paul SA Lopez-Martin J Schellens JHM Kao S Miller WH Jr Pembrolizumab after two or more lines of previous therapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic SCLC: results from the KEYNOTE-028 and KEYNOTE-158 studies J Thorac Oncol 2020 15 4 618 627 10.1016/j.jtho.2019.12.109 31870883

256. Wirsdörfer F de Leve S Jendrossek V Combining radiotherapy and immunotherapy in lung cancer: can we expect limitations due to altered normal tissue toxicity? Int J Mol Sci 2018 20 1 24 10.3390/ijms20010024 30577587 PMC6337556

257. Gordon JR Ma Y Churchman L Gordon SA Dawicki W Regulatory dendritic cells for immunotherapy in immunologic diseases Front Immunol 2014 5 7 10.3389/fimmu.2014.00007 24550907 PMC3907717

258. Shen Y Hao T Ou S Hu C Chen L Applications and perspectives of nanomaterials in novel vaccine development MedChemComm 2018 9 2 226 238 10.1039/C7MD00158D 30108916 PMC6083789

259. Mukherjee A Madamsetty VS Mukherjee S Emerging trends in immunomodulatory nanomaterials toward cancer therapy Synth Lect Biomed Eng 2021 16 1 i 84 10.1007/978-3-031-01669-1

260. Mukherjee A Paul M Mukherjee S Recent progress in the theranostics application of nanomedicine in lung cancer Cancers 2019 11 5 597 10.3390/cancers11050597 31035440 PMC6562381

261. Madamsetty VS Paul MK Mukherjee A Mukherjee S Functionalization of nanomaterials and their application in melanoma cancer theranostics ACS Biomater Sci Eng 2019 6 1 167 181 10.1021/acsbiomaterials.9b01426 33463233

262. Mukherjee S Madamsetty VS Bhattacharya D Roy Chowdhury S Paul MK Mukherjee A Recent advancements of nanomedicine in neurodegenerative disorders theranostics Adv Funct Mater 2020 30 35 2003054 10.1002/adfm.202003054

263. Ovais M Mukherjee S Pramanik A Das D Mukherjee A Raza A Designing stimuli-responsive upconversion nanoparticles that exploit the tumor microenvironment Adv Mater 2020 32 22 e2000055 10.1002/adma.202000055 32227413

264. Chiang C-S Lin Y-J Lee R Lai Y-H Cheng H-W Hsieh C-H Combination of fucoidan-based magnetic nanoparticles and immunomodulators enhances tumour-localized immunotherapy Nat Nanotechnol 2018 13 8 746 754 10.1038/s41565-018-0146-7 29760523

265. Zhang Q Wei W Wang P Zuo L Li F Xu J Biomimetic magnetosomes as versatile artificial antigen-presenting cells to potentiate t-cell-based anticancer therapy ACS Nano 2017 11 11 10724 10732 10.1021/acsnano.7b04955 28921946

266. Butts C Maksymiuk A Goss G Soulières D Marshall E Cormier Y Updated survival analysis in patients with stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer receiving BLP25 liposome vaccine (L-BLP25): phase IIB randomized, multicenter, open-label trial J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2011 137 9 1337 1342 10.1007/s00432-011-1003-3 21744082 PMC11828286

267. Mitchell P Thatcher N Socinski MA Wasilewska-Tesluk E Horwood K Szczesna A Tecemotide in unresectable stage III non-small-cell lung cancer in the phase III START study: updated overall survival and biomarker analyses Ann Oncol 2015 26 6 1134 1142 10.1093/annonc/mdv104 25722382

268. Kuai R Ochyl LJ Bahjat KS Schwendeman A Moon JJ Designer vaccine nanodiscs for personalized cancer immunotherapy Nat Mater 2016 16 4 489 496 10.1038/nmat4822 28024156 PMC5374005

269. Hosomi Y Morita S Sugawara S Kato T Fukuhara T Gemma A Gefitinib alone versus gefitinib plus chemotherapy for non–small-cell lung cancer with mutated epidermal growth factor receptor: NEJ009 study J Clin Oncol 2020 38 2 115 123 10.1200/JCO.19.01488 31682542

270. Li Z Liu Y Fang X Shu Z Nanomaterials enhance the immunomodulatory effect of molecular targeted therapy Int J Nanomed 2021 16 1631 1661 10.2147/IJN.S290346 PMC7935456 33688183

271. Domvri K Petanidis S Anestakis D Porpodis K Bai C Zarogoulidis P Dual photothermal MDSCs-targeted immunotherapy inhibits lung immunosuppressive metastasis by enhancing T-cell recruitment Nanoscale 2020 12 13 7051 7062 10.1039/D0NR00080A 32186564

272. Zou JY Su CH Luo HH Lei YY Zeng B Zhu HS Curcumin converts Foxp3+ regulatory T cells to T helper 1 cells in patients with lung cancer J Cell Biochem 2017 119 2 1420 1428 10.1002/jcb.26302 28731226

273. Yang M Li Z Tao J Hu H Li Z Zhang Z Resveratrol induces PD-L1 expression through snail-driven activation of Wnt pathway in lung cancer cells J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2021 147 4 1101 1113 10.1007/s00432-021-03510-z 33471184 PMC7954741

274. Cardenas H Arango D Nicholas C Duarte S Nuovo G He W Dietary apigenin exerts immune-regulatory activity in vivo by reducing NF-κB activity, halting leukocyte infiltration and restoring normal metabolic function Int J Mol Sci 2016 17 3 323 10.3390/ijms17030323 26938530 PMC4813185

275. Chen M Wang X Zha D Cai F Zhang W He Y Apigenin potentiates TRAIL therapy of non-small cell lung cancer via upregulating DR4/DR5 expression in a p53-dependent manner Sci Rep 2016 6 1 35468 10.1038/srep35468 27752089 PMC5067669

276 Sul O-J Ra SW Quercetin prevents LPS-induced oxidative stress and inflammation by modulating NOX2/ROS/NF-kB in lung epithelial cells Molecules 2021 26 22 6949 10.3390/molecules26226949 34834040 PMC8625571

277. Oo AM Mohd Adnan LH Nor NM Simbak N Ahmad NZ Lwin OM Immunomodulatory effects of flavonoids: An experimental study on natural-killer-cell-mediated cytotoxicity against lung cancer and cytotoxic granule secretion profile Proc Singapore Healthc 2020 30 4 279 285 10.1177/2010105820979006

278. Choi K-C Lee Y-H Jung MG Kwon SH Kim M-J Jun WJ Gallic acid suppresses lipopolysaccharide-induced nuclear factor-κB signaling by preventing RelA acetylation in A549 lung cancer cells Mol Cancer Res 2009 7 12 2011 2021 10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-09-0239 19996305

279. Joo JH Jetten AM NF-κB-dependent transcriptional activation in lung carcinoma cells by farnesol involves p65/RelA(Ser276) phosphorylation via the MEK-MSK1 signaling pathway J Biol Chem 2008 283 24 16391 16399 10.1074/jbc.M800945200 18424438 PMC2423266

280. Cao S-Y Li Y Meng X Zhao C-N Li S Gan R-Y Dietary natural products and lung cancer: effects and mechanisms of action J Funct Foods 2019 52 316 331 10.1016/j.jff.2018.11.004

281. Wang W-J Wu Y-S Chen S Liu C-F Chen S-N Mushroomβ-Glucan may immunomodulate the tumor-associated macrophages in the lewis lung carcinoma Biomed Res Int 2015 2015 1 15 10.1155/2015/604385 PMC4488085 26167490

282. Li Y Gu JF Zou X Wu J Zhang MH Jiang J The anti-lung cancer activities of steroidal saponins of P. polyphylla Smith var. chinensis (Franch) Hara through enhanced immunostimulation in experimental Lewis tumor-bearing C57BL/6 mice and induction of Apoptosis in the A549 cell line Molecules 2013 18 10 12916 36 10.3390/molecules181012916 24141243 PMC6269684

283. Shiku H Wang H Chan Y-L Li T-L Bauer BA Hsia S Reduction of splenic immunosuppressive cells and enhancement of anti-tumor immunity by synergy of fish oil and selenium yeast PloS one. 2013 8 1 e52912 10.1371/journal.pone.0052912 23349693 PMC3551929

284 Maiuolo J Gliozzi M Carresi C Musolino V Oppedisano F Scarano F Nutraceuticals and cancer: potential for natural polyphenols Nutrients 2021 13 11 3834 10.3390/nu13113834 34836091 PMC8619660

285 Niedzwiecki A Roomi M Kalinovsky T Rath M Anticancer efficacy of polyphenols and their combinations Nutrients 2016 8 9 552 10.3390/nu8090552 27618095 PMC5037537

286. Zhou Y Zheng J Li Y Xu D-P Li S Chen Y-M Natural polyphenols for prevention and treatment of cancer Nutrients 2016 8 8 515 10.3390/nu8080515 27556486 PMC4997428

287. Bosch-Barrera J Sais E Cañete N Marruecos J Cuyàs E Izquierdo A Response of brain metastasis from lung cancer patients to an oral nutraceutical product containing silibinin Oncotarget 2016 7 22 32006 32014 10.18632/oncotarget.7900 26959886 PMC5077992

288. Sanmamed MF Chester C Melero I Kohrt H Defining the optimal murine models to investigate immune checkpoint blockers and their combination with other immunotherapies Ann Oncol 2016 27 7 1190 1198 10.1093/annonc/mdw041 26912558

289. Chulpanova DS Kitaeva KV Rutland CS Rizvanov AA Solovyeva VV Mouse tumor models for advanced cancer immunotherapy Int J Mol Sci 2020 21 11 4118 10.3390/ijms21114118 32526987 PMC7312663

290. Salehi-Rad R Li R Tran LM Lim RJ Abascal J Momcilovic M Novel Kras-mutant murine models of non-small cell lung cancer possessing co-occurring oncogenic mutations and increased tumor mutational burden Cancer Immunol Immunother 2021 70 8 2389 2400 10.1007/s00262-020-02837-9 33507343 PMC8289771

291. Zloza A Karolina Palucka A Coussens LM Gotwals PJ Headley MB Jaffee EM Workshop on challenges, insights, and future directions for mouse and humanized models in cancer immunology and immunotherapy: a report from the associated programs of the 2016 annual meeting for the Society for Immunotherapy of cancer J ImmunoTher Cancer 2017 5 1 77 10.1186/s40425-017-0278-6 28923102 PMC5604351

292. Shi Y-X Sheng D-Q Cheng L Song X-Y Current landscape of epigenetics in lung cancer: focus on the mechanism and application J Oncol 2019 2019 1 11 10.1155/2019/8107318 PMC6930737 31889956

293. Hirsch FR Scagliotti GV Mulshine JL Kwon R Curran WJ Wu Y-L Lung cancer: current therapies and new targeted treatments The Lancet 2017 389 10066 299 311 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30958-8 27574741

294. Liu F Wu H CC Chemokine receptors in lung adenocarcinoma: the inflammation-related prognostic biomarkers and immunotherapeutic targets J Inflamm Res 2021 14 267 285 10.2147/JIR.S278395 33574689 PMC7872903

295. Jin L Cao L Zhu Y Cao J Li X Zhou J Enhance anti-lung tumor efficacy of chimeric antigen receptor-T cells by ectopic expression of C-C motif chemokine receptor 6 Sci Bull 2021 66 8 803 812 10.1016/j.scib.2020.12.027 36654137

296. Adachi K Kano Y Nagai T Okuyama N Sakoda Y Tamada K IL-7 and CCL19 expression in CAR-T cells improves immune cell infiltration and CAR-T cell survival in the tumor Nat Biotechnol 2018 36 4 346 351 10.1038/nbt.4086 29505028

297. Tan WCC Nerurkar SN Cai HY Ng HHM Wu D Wee YTF Overview of multiplex immunohistochemistry/immunofluorescence techniques in the era of cancer immunotherapy Cancer Commun 2020 40 4 135 153 10.1002/cac2.12023 PMC7170662 32301585

298. Lu Y-C Zheng Z Lowery FJ Gartner JJ Prickett TD Robbins PF Direct identification of neoantigen-specific TCRs from tumor specimens by high-throughput single-cell sequencing J ImmunoTher Cancer 2021 9 7 e002595 10.1136/jitc-2021-002595 34321276 PMC8320258

299. Chen B Khodadoust MS Olsson N Wagar LE Fast E Liu CL Predicting HLA class II antigen presentation through integrated deep learning Nat Biotechnol 2019 37 11 1332 1343 10.1038/s41587-019-0280-2 31611695 PMC7075463

300 Wu J Wang W Zhang J Zhou B Zhao W Su Z DeepHLApan: a deep learning approach for neoantigen prediction considering both HLA-peptide binding and immunogenicity Front Immunol 2019 10 2559 10.3389/fimmu.2019.02559 31736974 PMC6838785

301. Bulik-Sullivan B Busby J Palmer CD Davis MJ Murphy T Clark A Deep learning using tumor HLA peptide mass spectrometry datasets improves neoantigen identification Nat Biotechnol 2018 37 1 55 63 10.1038/nbt.4313 30556813

302. Zaidi N Soban M Chen F Kinkead H Mathew J Yarchoan M Role of in silico structural modeling in predicting immunogenic neoepitopes for cancer vaccine development JCI Insight. 2020 5 17 e136991 10.1172/jci.insight.136991 32879142 PMC7526456

303. Lapuente-Santana Ó van Genderen M Hilbers PAJ Finotello F Eduati F Interpretable systems biomarkers predict response to immune-checkpoint inhibitors Patterns 2021 2 8 100293 10.1016/j.patter.2021.100293 34430923 PMC8369166

304. Haanen JBAG Carbonnel F Robert C Kerr KM Peters S Larkin J Corrections to “Management of toxicities from immunotherapy: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up Ann Oncol 2018 29 iv264 iv6 10.1093/annonc/mdy162 29917046

305. Porcu M De Silva P Solinas C Battaglia A Schena M Scartozzi M Immunotherapy associated pulmonary toxicity: biology behind clinical and radiological features Cancers 2019 11 3 305 10.3390/cancers11030305 30841554 PMC6468855