Journal: Molecular Therapy Oncology

Article Title: Engineered Salmonella -mediated c-di-AMP delivery activates STING to remodel the tumor microenvironment

doi: 10.1016/j.omton.2026.201185

Figure Lengend Snippet: Effect of SL disA therapy on T cells and macrophage from tumor samples (A, B) Flow Cytometry analysis of CD3 and CD8 surface markers(A) and CD3 + CD8 + cells statistical graph (B). (C, D) Flow cytometry analysis of CD3 and CD4 surface markers (C) and CD3 + CD4 + cells statistical graph (D). (E, F) Flow cytometry analysis of F4/80 and CD86 surface markers (E) and F4/80 + CD86 + cells statistical graph (F). Data are expressed as mean ± SEM, n = 3. ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001, ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001, one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons tests.

Article Snippet: The following antibodies were used: FITC anti-mouse F4/80 (clone CI: A3-1), APC anti-mouse CD86 (clone GL-1), FITC anti-mouse CD3 (clone 17A2), APC anti-mouse CD4 (clone GK1.5), and APC anti-mouse CD8 (clone YTS-169), all purchased from Elabscience Biotechnology Co., Ltd.

Techniques: Flow Cytometry

Journal: Cell Reports Medicine

Article Title: Immunogenic tumor cell death and T-cell-derived IFN-γ elicit tumoricidal macrophages to potentiate OX40 immunotherapy

doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2026.102699

Figure Lengend Snippet: NOS2-expressing macrophages is associated with response to αOX40 therapy (A) UMAP of monocytes/macrophages subclusters from scRNA-seq data in αOX40-treated MC38-bearing mice. (B) Representative marker genes in the monocyte/macrophage subclusters. (C) Pie chart showing the proportional distribution of monocyte/macrophage subsets of responders and nonresponders. (D) QuSAGE pathway analysis demonstrated enrichment of innate immune and phagocytic signaling pathways in distinct monocyte/macrophage subsets. (E) UMAP showing Mac_C1 signature genes and a heatmap of immune-related gene expression across TAM subclusters ( Z score normalized). (F) Violin plots comparing Nos2 expression levels in Mac_C1 subset between responsive and nonresponsive. (G) Flow cytometry analysis shows the percentage of M1-like (F4/80 + NOS2 + ) and M2-like (F4/80 + CD206 + ) macrophages in tumor tissues of control ( n = 5 mice), nonresponders (with minimal to no response, n = 4 mice), and responders (with a robust therapeutic response, n = 4 mice). (H and I) Comparison of Nos2 expression levels in responders versus nonresponders pre- or post-αOX40 treatment. Bilateral-MC38-bearing mice were treated with αOX40, and tumors from one side were analyzed by RNA-seq prior to (H) or following αOX40 treatment (I). The Nos2 expression was analyzed from RNA-seq data (left) and validated by RT-qPCR (right) ( n = 5 biological replicates). (J) NOS2 expression in tumor biopsies post-treatment determined by RNA-seq. Patients with advanced solid tumors and >1 prior therapy received HFB301001 monotherapy. Tumor biopsy samples were obtained on day 8 of cycle 2 for subsequent RNA-seq analysis. NOS2 expression were compared between patients achieving stable disease (SD, n = 3) and those with progressive disease (PD, n = 3). (K) GO enrichment analysis of upregulated genes in Mac_C1 of responders. (L) Calreticulin expression was quantified by flow cytometry in different response groups following αOX40 treatment ( n = 3 mice per group). (M) NOS2 expression in BMDMs was analyzed by flow cytometry after stimulation with CD8 + T cell supernatant and MC38 lysate, combined with TLR inhibition and IFN-γ blockade ( n = 5 biological replicates). (N) Quantification of Nos2 expression in BMDM by RT-qPCR after 24-h stimulation with MPLA (TLR4 agonist, 100 ng/mL), IFN-γ (20 ng/mL), or both. Data normalized to Gapdh and presented as fold-change relative to unstimulated controls ( n = 4 biological replicates). Data are shown as means ± SD from one of two independent experiments (G, H, I, L, M, and N). Statistical significance was determined using one-way ANOVA with multiple comparisons (G, L, M, and N) or using an unpaired two-tailed t test (H, I, and J). n.s., not significant; ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001, ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001; VST, variance stabilized transformation; sup., supernatant; lys., tumor lysate; inh., inhibitor.

Article Snippet: TAMs were isolated from tumor single-cell suspensions or splenocytes using F4/80 microBeads (130-110-443, Miltenyi Biotec).

Techniques: Expressing, Marker, Protein-Protein interactions, Gene Expression, Flow Cytometry, Control, Clinical Proteomics, Comparison, RNA Sequencing, Quantitative RT-PCR, Inhibition, Two Tailed Test, Transformation Assay

Journal: Cell Reports Medicine

Article Title: Immunogenic tumor cell death and T-cell-derived IFN-γ elicit tumoricidal macrophages to potentiate OX40 immunotherapy

doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2026.102699

Figure Lengend Snippet: NOS2-high macrophages are significantly associated with Combo treatment efficacy (A) UMAP of macrophage subclusters from scRNA-seq data of MC38-bearing mice treated with control, MPLA+IFN-γ, αOX40, or Combo. Cells are color-coded by annotated subtype. (B) Bubble chart showing the top variable marker genes for identified macrophage subclusters. (C) Pie chart shows the relative abundance of four macrophage subclusters in control, αOX40, MPLA+IFN-γ, or Combo. (D) GO pathway analysis identifying significantly enriched signaling pathways in the Mac_S2 subcluster compared to other macrophage subpopulations. (E) Violin plots showing Nos2 expression levels across macrophage subclusters. (F) Violin plots comparing Nos2 and Cd206 expression levels among different treatment groups. (G) Frequency of M1-like, M2-like, or the ratio of M1/M2-like macrophage cells in tumor tissues from control, αOX40, MPLA+IFN-γ, and Combo groups with two time points, as determined by flow cytometry ( n = 5–10 mice per group). (H) Multiple immunofluorescence signal intensities of NOS2 + F4/80 + and CD206 + F4/80 + cells in the TME of control, αOX40, MPLA+IFN-γ, and Combo groups. Scale bars, 20 μm. Data are shown as means ± SD from one of two independent experiments (G and H). Statistical significance was determined using one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test (G). n.s., not significant; ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001, ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001.

Article Snippet: TAMs were isolated from tumor single-cell suspensions or splenocytes using F4/80 microBeads (130-110-443, Miltenyi Biotec).

Techniques: Control, Marker, Protein-Protein interactions, Expressing, Flow Cytometry, Immunofluorescence