cancers

Review
Immune Evasion in Pancreatic Cancer:
From Mechanisms to Therapy
Neus Martinez-Bosch 1 ID
, Judith Vinaixa 1 and Pilar Navarro 1,2, *
1 Cancer Research Program, Hospital del Mar Medical Research Institute (IMIM), Barcelona 08003, Spain;
nmartinez@imim.es (N.M.-B.); jvinaixa@imim.es (J.V.)
2 Institute of Biomedical Research of Barcelona (IIBB-CSIC), Barcelona 08036, Spain
* Correspondence: pnavarro@imim.es; Tel.: +34-93-316-0400

Received: 1 December 2017; Accepted: 27 December 2017; Published: 3 January 2018

Abstract: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA), the most frequent type of pancreatic cancer,
remains one of the most challenging problems for the biomedical and clinical fields, with abysmal
survival rates and poor therapy efficiency. Desmoplasia, which is abundant in PDA, can be blamed
for much of the mechanisms behind poor drug performance, as it is the main source of the cytokines
and chemokines that orchestrate rapid and silent tumor progression to allow tumor cells to be
isolated into an extensive fibrotic reaction, which results in inefficient drug delivery. However,
since immunotherapy was proclaimed as the breakthrough of the year in 2013, the focus on the
stroma of pancreatic cancer has interestingly moved from activated fibroblasts to the immune
compartment, trying to understand the immunosuppressive factors that play a part in the strong
immune evasion that characterizes PDA. The PDA microenvironment is highly immunosuppressive
and is basically composed of T regulatory cells (Tregs), tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs),
and myeloid-derived suppressive cells (MDSCs), which block CD8+ T-cell duties in tumor recognition
and clearance. Interestingly, preclinical data have highlighted the importance of this immune evasion
as the source of resistance to single checkpoint immunotherapies and cancer vaccines and point at
pathways that inhibit the immune attack as a key to solve the therapy puzzle. Here, we will discuss
the molecular mechanisms involved in PDA immune escape as well as the state of the art of the
PDA immunotherapy.

Keywords: pancreatic cancer; immune surveillance; galectins; immunotherapy; immune checkpoints;

stroma

1. Introduction
The immune system plays a key role in both the positive and negative regulation of tumor
development and progression, and crosstalk between cancer cells and immune cells has been
incorporated into the list of major hallmarks of cancer [1]. While immune surveillance [2,3] is the first
filter to identify and eliminate aberrant or malignant cells, some tumor cells have developed numerous
strategies to avoid recognition by the host immune cells, allowing them to escape from immune control
and continue cancer progression. Different mechanisms are involved in tumor immune evasion. First,
cancer cells can decrease immune recognition by downregulating antigen presentation pathways,
like the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) I proteins, TAP (transporter associated with
antigen processing) protein and latent membrane proteins (LMP2 and LMP7) [4–9]. Moreover, genetic
instability of tumors and constant cell division can result in the loss of tumor antigens recognized by
effector T-cells (CD8+ or CD4+ T-cells). These changes in the immunogenicity of cancer cells leading
to immune-resistant clones have been called tumor “immunoediting” [10]. Second, tumor cells and
other cells from the tumor microenvironment can promote an immune privilege status by secretion
of immunosuppressive cytokines—such as IL-1, IL-6, IL-10, TGFβ, TNFα, or VEGF [11–18]—or

Cancers 2018, 10, 6; doi:10.3390/cancers10010006 www.mdpi.com/journal/cancers

Cancers 2018, 10, 6 2 of 16

modulation of the expression of immunoregulatory molecules to induce T cell anergy or tolerance,

such as the immune checkpoints molecules of the B7 family (PD1/PDL1, B7-1, B7-2/CTLA4,
B7-H4), A2AR, LAG-3, galectin-9/TIM-3, IDO, and VISTA [19–22]. Finally, overexpression of STAT3
or BCL-2 by tumor cells increases their resistance to apoptosis and also contributes to immune
escape. Altogether, these mechanisms orchestrate an immunosuppressive cancer microenvironment
through inhibition of immune cells involved in tumor rejection—CD4+ /CD8+ T lymphocytes and
natural killer (NK) cells—together with the recruitment and/or activation of immunosuppressive
cells, like CD4+ CD25+ FoxP3+ T regulatory cells (Tregs), myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs)
and anti-inflammatory M2 macrophages. Although there is considerable knowledge about these
immune evasion strategies and how to face them using immunotherapy in several tumor types
(such as in melanomas, lung cancer, or lymphomas), little is known about pancreatic cancer. Here,
we review the molecular mechanisms involved in the immunosuppressive nature of pancreatic ductal
adenocarcinoma (PDA) and the current progress that has been made in immunology-based therapy
against this dismal disease.

2. PDA Tumor Heterogeneity and Immune Responses

Genomic analyses have revealed the biological complexity and high tumor heterogeneity of PDA.
Whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing studies have revealed a high number of somatic copy
number alterations and mutations in pancreatic cancer, leading to altered expression of key oncogenes
and tumor suppressor genes, such as KRAS, TP53, SMAD4, and CDKN2A [23–26]. More recent
studies from the Australian Pancreatic Cancer Genome Initiative/International Cancer Genome
Consortium [27] and from The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) network [28] have validated these
results and have also added a long list of other less-frequently mutated genes, confirming the
complex molecular landscape of pancreatic cancer. These gene expression analyses have allowed PDA
patients to be classified according to their molecular signatures into different subtypes that associate
with histopathological hallmarks and prognosis, providing new avenues for personalized medicine.
The most recent subcategories proposed for PDA include four subtypes: (1) pancreatic progenitor
or classical PDA, which express early pancreatic development genes (i.e., PDX1, FOXA2/3, HES1);
(2) squamous or quasimesenchymal tumors, which have increased TP53 mutations, upregulated
TP63∆N and activated TGF-β signaling and MYC pathways and a poor prognosis; (3) aberrantly
differentiated endocrine/exocrine tumors, which overexpress genes involved in KRAS activation and
exocrine (NR5A, RBPJL) and endocrine (NEUROD1, NKX2-2) markers; and (4) immunogenic PDA.
The last subtype has molecular similarities to classical PDA, but also expresses genes associated to
immune phenotypes, such as Toll-like receptors, antigen presentation molecules and genes related
to infiltrating B and T cells, both T-cytotoxic (CD8+ ) and Tregs. Moreover, these tumors also show
upregulation of the immune checkpoint molecules CTLA4 and PD1, suggesting that the immunogenic
PDA subtype may be sensitive to immunotherapy.
However, most pancreatic tumors do not belong to the immunogenic subtype, and PDA
is therefore generally described as a poorly immunogenic tumor. The PDA immunosuppressive
microenvironment is mainly composed of Tregs, macrophages and MDSCs, which block the
anti-tumoral activity of effector CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells [29–32]. These immunosuppressive cells
are already present in preneoplastic lesions (PanINs), indicating that they may be key players in tumor
initiation [33]. The important role of Tregs in PDA has been shown in a murine model, in which
disruption of these cells correlated with tumor growth inhibition [34]. Tumor-associated macrophages
(TAMs) also play important functions in pancreatic tumor chronic inflammation, progression and
metastasis. TAMs express chemokine (C-C motif) receptor type 2 (CCR2), a chemokine receptor that
interacts with chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 2 (CCL2) and exerts a pro-tumoral role mediating tumor
proliferation, angiogenesis, and chemotaxis of immune suppressive cells to the tumor stroma [35].
PDA also contributes to immunosuppression by upregulation of negative T cell co-stimulatory
molecules [36]. In this regard, PDL1 and PDL2 are overexpressed in PDA patients [37] and
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 3 of 16

correlate with reduced tumor-infiltrating leukocytes (TILs) and worse prognosis [38,39]. Accordingly,
downregulation of PDL1 inhibits pancreatic tumor cell proliferation [40]. Furthermore, increased
expression of inhibitory molecules on inactivated T cells has been suggested as another way to induce
pancreatic cancer immunosuppression. Thus, pancreatic tumors show a high expression of CD40, a cell
membrane receptor of the tumor necrosis factor family that modulates immune response, and this
overexpression is associated to higher TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours (TNM) staging and
metastasis [41].
Another reason to explain the PDA immunosuppressive phenotype might be its mutational
signature. Indeed, recent cancer mutational analyses have demonstrated high variability among
tumors, indicating that those tumors with increased mutation rate, like melanoma or lung, are highly
immunogenic while those with low mutation rate, as PDA [23], are poorly antigenic [42–44].
Interestingly, very recent data have indicated that neoantigen quality, rather than quantity, may
modulate immunogenicity of PDA [45]. This study suggests that the immune response against
neoantigens with unique qualities generated during pancreatic tumor evolution, such as neoantigens
in mucin 16, can lead to decreased relapse and the best prognosis. Further studies to identify other PDA
immunogenic hotspots could be encouraging for the development of neoantigen-targeted strategies
for treating checkpoint blockade-resistant patients which, unfortunately, are the vast majority.

3. Immune Checkpoints in PDA

Immune checkpoints refer to several co-stimulatory and inhibitory signals in immune cells that,
in physiological conditions, prevent autoimmunity and constrict tissue damage during infections.
However, these pathways can be hijacked by tumor cells to achieve immune evasion [46,47]. Among the
many different immune checkpoints that regulate T-cell activation, cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated
antigen 4 (CTLA4) and programmed cell death protein 1 (PD1) are the most well characterized and
studied for cancer immunotherapy.
CTLA4 is expressed by activated T cells and Tregs and binds to its ligands B7-1/CD80 and
B7-2/CD86 on the surface of antigen-presenting cells, which leads to downregulation of T helper cells
and enhancement of Treg-mediated immune suppression [46–48]. Interestingly, a blockade of CTLA4
in preclinical murine cancer models restores effector T-cells and decreases Tregs in melanoma [49,50]
and colorectal cancer [51], demonstrating the important role of this molecule in tumor immune
evasion. As PDA is characterized for its highly immunosuppressive stroma rich in Tregs, a CTLA4
immune checkpoint emerges as a promising target also for PDA treatment. Indeed, recent data by
Bengsch et al. [52] using PDA mouse models have demonstrated that blocking CTLA4 in Tregs induces
CD4+ T-cell tumor infiltration, suggesting an important role for pancreatic cancer immunotherapy.
However, PDA patients enrolled in clinical trials with α-CTLA4 immunotherapy failed to respond to
the treatment [53–55]. Similar results were obtained in a genetically-engineered PDA murine model
(KPC model), in which treatment with α-CTLA4 monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) showed no effects
on tumor growth or survival [56]. Nonetheless, T-cell stimulation with agonistic α-CD40 mAbs plus
gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel induced tumor regression and increased survival [56], suggesting
that CD40-mediated induction of the T-cell response can overcome PDA resistance to α-CTLA4
immunotherapy (see below). In contrast, other studies using a PDA model after Panc02 subcutaneous
injection showed tumor rejection in 50% of mice after α-CTLA4 treatment [57]. These discrepancies in
α-CTLA4 therapy efficacy can be a consequence of the origin of Panc02 cells, which are derived from
a mouse tumor generated by carcinogen induction [58] and, therefore, are probably hypermutated
and display higher antigenicity than KPC tumors (and most human PDAs, see Section 2 (PDA Tumor
Heterogeneity and Immune Responses).
Regarding the PD1/PDL1 immune checkpoint, PDL1 overexpression has been reported in PDA
tumors, both in tumor cells and in the scarce immune infiltrates [38,56], and increased PDL1 expression
is associated with poor survival [38]. Controversial data regarding the correlation of PDL1 expression
and presence of infiltrating CD8+ T cells [38] have been reported [38,56]. PD1 has been found to be
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 4 of 16

expressed in about half of pancreatic tumor cytotoxic infiltrates [59]. Overexpression of PDL1 is also
found in the KPC mouse model of PDA, for which moderate staining was observed in around 40% of
tumor cells as well as in stromal dendritic cells (DCs) and macrophages, which express higher PDL1
levels than their counterparts in the spleen. Moreover, tumor-infiltrating T-lymphocytes, including
Tregs and few CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, also express PD1 at higher levels than that of the spleen
populations [56]. These results point to a role of the PD1/PDL1 immune checkpoint in PDA immune
evasion. Similar to α-CTLA4 therapy, Pan02 tumors provide objective responses to α-PD1 or α-PDL1
therapies [38,60]. However, KPC tumors are refractory to α-PD1 or α-PDL1 mAbs, either alone or in
combination with α-CTLA4 therapy; this resistance could be reverted, however, by combined treatment
with α-CD40 and chemotherapy [56]. Importantly, Winograd et al. demonstrated that this combined
regimen not only induces tumor rejection in a CD8+ T-cell-dependent manner, but also increases the
capability of mice to reject subsequent tumor insults, suggesting that an anti-tumor immune memory
with high therapeutic potential is generated. Indeed ongoing clinical trials in patients with α-CD40 are
giving promising results [61] (see below).

4. Role of Galectins in Immune Evasion in PDA

Among the different mechanisms involved in immune evasion, galectins—a family of proteins
with high affinity for β-galactoside residues—have recently emerged as one of the key players in the
regulation of lymphoid and myeloid cells in cancer. This family comprises 15 members, which share
a consensus carbohydrate recognition domain (CRD) responsible for their glycan binding [62–64].
Some galectins contain only one CRD and are active as monomers (galectin [Gal]-5, -7, and -10) or
dimers (Gal-1, -2, -11, -13, -14, and -15), while Gal-4, -6, -8, -9, and -12 contain two CRD linked by a short
peptide. Gal-3 is the only member that contains one CRD and a non-lectin domain, which allows its
oligomerization [63,65]. Although galectins can act both via sugar-dependent and sugar-independent
interactions, most of their biological functions are via interactions with glycosylated proteins on the cell
surface or in the extracellular matrix, playing key roles in cell-cell adhesion, migration and signaling.
Galectins can be localized in different cell compartments [66] and also secreted extracellularly through
a non-classical secretory pathway [67].
Importantly, altered expression of different members of the galectin family has been reported in
several cancer types. In particular, Gal-1 overexpression is frequently associated with poor prognosis of
many tumors [68], while Gal-3 and Gal-9 expression are tumor type–dependent [66]. Overexpression
of galectins in cancer induce pro-tumoral functions like proliferation, epithelial to mesenchymal
transition, angiogenesis and, remarkably, tumor immune evasion [69–73].
The role of galectins in the regulation of immune system has been widely studied. Gal-1 can
recognize a variety of glycoproteins on the T-cell surface, inhibiting transendothelial T-cell migration,
T-cell activation and, importantly, promoting apoptosis of activated Th1 and Th17 CD8+ T cells, thereby
tilting the immune balance towards a Th2 profile [74,75]. Additionally, Gal-1 can induce Treg and
DC differentiation, impair NK cell recruitment to the tumor, induce M2 macrophage polarization
and promote expansion of MDSCs and γδ-T cells [76,77]. Altogether, these modulatory functions on
different immune cell populations lead to a key role for Gal-1 in immune evasion, both in physiology
during self-recognition and in pathology during cancer progression. Gal-1’s contribution to tumor
immunosuppression has also been reported in PDA. Pancreatic stellate cells (PSC) are responsible for
Gal-1 secretion and overexpression in the tumor microenvironment. In this context, extracellular Gal-1
secreted by PSC reduces viability of both CD4+ and CD8+ infiltrating activated T-cells [78]. Moreover,
a high level of Gal-1 favors a significant anti-tumor Th2 cytokine secretion and a drastically decrease
of Th1 cytokine production [78]. Importantly, Gal-1 is highly expressed in the stroma of human and
murine pancreatic tumors, where it drives tumor progression through stroma activation, induced
angiogenesis tumor cell proliferation and acinar-to-ductal metaplasia [79]. Of note, when genetically
inhibiting Gal-1, tumors show a significantly enhanced number of T-cell infiltrates and neutrophils [79],
suggesting that galectin-1 may be key in driving immune evasion in PDA [80,81].
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 5 of 16

Gal-3 regulates immune system responses that act as a chemoattractant for monocytes and
macrophages [82], impairing NK anti-tumor function. It also controls expansion of DCs [77] and is
able to modulate T-cell responses through apoptosis, T-cell receptor downregulation and crosslinking,
consequently inhibiting T-cell activation [83]. Gal-3 also promotes reduced immune response by
decreasing IL-5 production and blocking B lymphocyte differentiation [84]. Interestingly, in PDA,
treating tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T-cells with α-Gal-3 mAb boosts their activation by increased IFNγ
secretion. Upon ex vivo restimulation, the polysaccharide GCS-100, which is in clinical development,
can detach Gal-3 from TILs. This favors activation of both CD8+ and CD4+ T cells and secretion of
anti-tumor cytokines. Importantly, in vaccinated tumor-bearing mice, GCS-100 injections result in
tumor regression [85]. Of note, Gal-3 binding to LAG-3 induces CD8+ T cell suppression in vitro and
Gal-3 KO mice show increased T effector functions upon GM-CSF vaccine administration [86]. Indeed,
phase I clinical trials (with still inconclusive results) have already been designed with Gal-3 inhibitors
in combination with peptide vaccines, as well as with the immune checkpoint inhibitors ipilimumab
(α-CTLA4) and pembrolizumab (α-PD1), in metastatic melanoma. Importantly, Gal-3 has already been
added to the list of “new generation” checkpoints in immunotherapy [47].
Finally, Gal-9 also has crucial roles in controlling immune regulatory circuits, both in immune
cell homeostasis and during cancer immune surveillance. Gal-9 can induce Treg cell differentiation
and promote expansion of immunosuppressive MDSCs. Importantly, it specifically triggers apoptosis
by interacting with TIM-3 in Th1 and CD8+ T cells [77,87], which has also placed Gal-9 in the
“new generation” checkpoint list [47,88]. Interestingly, Gal-9 has the ability to modulate immune
responses in PDA [89]. Gal-9 is a ligand for dectin-1, which is an innate immune receptor highly
expressed in macrophages in PDA. The dectin-1/Gal-9 axis plays a key role in promoting differentiation
of TAMs to a M2-like phenotype. Importantly, Gal-9 inhibition restores intratumoral T-cell infiltrates
in PDA, but this function is impaired in the context of a dectin-1 deletion, suggesting that the
dectin-1/Gal-9 interaction is key in reprogramming CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells for regulating tumor
progression; thus, highlighting these players as targets in immunotherapy [89].

5. Other Molecular Mechanisms of Immune Escape in PDA

Preclinical evaluation of checkpoint inhibitors in PDA therapy has been considered; however,
as PDA is a non-immunogenic tumor, monotherapy blocking of the PD1/PDL1 axis or CTLA4 have
not been successful [56,90]. Nevertheless, strategies stimulating the immune system in parallel with
other treatments have shed some light on the field and present promising outcomes.
An α-CD40 antibody plus chemotherapy alters the phenotype of TILs, and, in combination with
α-PD1 or α-CTLA4, or both, leads to regression of established tumors due to reduced number of
Tregs and enhanced CD8:Treg ratio [56,91]. Interestingly, Feig et al. reported that depletion of FAP+
cells in the tumor hampered tumor growth, due to increased infiltrating CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells,
and synergized with checkpoint monotherapies [90]. C-X-C motif chemokine ligand 12 (CXCL12)
was found to be the chemokine responsible for recruiting effector T cells, and targeting its receptor
(CXCR4) resulted in reduced pancreatic tumor growth in a T-cell-dependent manner. In combination
with α-PDL1, the number of proliferating cancer cells in tumors are greatly reduced [90]. Additionally,
in a more recent report [92], CXCR2 inhibitors (which increase the amount of infiltrating CD3+
T-cells in KPC mice) were administered in a priming phase to enhance pancreatic T-cell infiltration,
and animals were subsequently treated with either a combination of CXCR2 inhibitors and α-PD1 or
directly with α-PD1 as a control. Immune checkpoint blockade proved to be efficient when targeting
CXCR2 in parallel, significantly increasing animal survival by reducing the proliferation tumor
rates as well as enhancing the proportion of both CD4+ and CD8+ T cells while diminishing Tregs.
IL-6 blockade in combination with α-PDL1 also increased T-cell infiltration and synergistic outcomes
in immunocompetent mouse models [93]. Ruxolitinib (a JAK-Stat inhibitor), which inhibits systemic
inflammation in the stroma of pancreatic cancer, also enhances cytotoxic T lymphocyte infiltration and
boosts α-PD1 therapy in an orthotopic mouse model of PDA [94].
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 6 of 16

Multiple additional different designs have been proposed in preclinical studies to target the
PDA immunosuppressive microenvironment and to increase immunotherapy efficiency, such as
combinations with chemotherapy, radiation, therapeutic vaccines, or even several of these together [95].
For instance, addition of α-PDL1 to high radiotherapy doses improved responses in KPC and
Pan02 allografts, by shifting the balance towards increased CD8+ T cells at the expense of reducing
CD11b+ Gr1+ myeloid infiltrations [96]. The combination of checkpoint inhibitors with therapeutic
vaccines to prime the microenvironment with effector T cells before repressing the inhibitory
signals [97] has also shown impressive results. For example, GVAX together with α-PD1 therapy
improves survival of tumor-bearing mice [98]. More sophisticated mechanisms have also provided
alternatives to increase immunotherapy efficiency, such as targeting the MLL1-H3K4me3 epigenetic
axis [59] or using antiangiogenic therapy to form intratumoral HEVs (high endothelial venules) to
facilitate CTL tumor infiltration [99].

6. PDA and Immunotherapy

Pancreatic cancer clearly remains in dire needs of efficient treatment options. Considering that
the current chemotherapy regimens have only led to extremely low levels of improvement in survival
rates, and in light of the data showing that the immunosuppressive microenvironment is a feasible
source of resistance, immunotherapy in clinical trials has raised high expectations. However, results
from the initial studies with checkpoint inhibitors have not met expectations, and more sophisticated
combinations are now being contemplated.
The first pathways to be tested in clinical trials concerned checkpoint inhibitions (Figure 1).
α-CTLA4 ipilimumab was assessed in a phase II clinical trial [54] in patients with advanced disease.
RECIST (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors) reported an overall lack of response, although
the condition of one patient (of 27) did improve due to the treatment. Several clinical trials with
ipilimumab have been organized, which combine it with chemotherapy and/or stimulators of the
immune response, such as GVAX; these have achieved mild improvements in overall survival (OS)
and one-year OS [55]. Most of these combinatory clinical trials have not yet published their results.
A phase I dose escalation of another α-CTLA4 (tremelimumab) has been also performed in patients
with metastatic pancreatic cancer [100], opening the door to further advanced clinical trials to evaluate
its safety and efficacy, alone or in combination with radiation and other immune checkpoint inhibitors.
The first results on treating pancreatic cancer with α-PD1 pembrolizumab have just been published.
The PembroPlus phase Ib study [101] studied the safety of combinations of α-PD1 and different
chemotherapy agents, although conclusions about efficiency require further data. A phase Ib/II
study of gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel and pembrolizumab in 17 metastatic PDA patients [102] was
recently presented without meeting its primary endpoint. Twenty clinical trials with pembrolizumab
in pancreatic cancer are active at the moment. BMS-956559 α-PDL1 achieved good performance
in a phase I study with different solid tumors, although no objective responses were observed in
pancreatic cancer patients [53]. Eleven clinical trials are running with α-PDL1 durvalumab in pancreatic
cancer, in different combinations. Although CTLA4 and PD1/PDL1 are the most well-studied immune
checkpoints, other molecules of this type, such as LAG-3, TIM-3, and A2AR, also function to shut
down the immune response and are also being considered for immunotherapy in clinical trials [103].
Therapeutic cancer vaccines using cancer cell antigens mixed with agents that stimulate patient
immune responses have shown impressive results in several tumors and are also in the spotlight
in pancreatic cancer clinical trials (Figure 1). For instance, GVAX (a GM-CSF vaccine) presented
favorable results in a phase I study [104] and phase II studies in combination with cyclophosphamide
(to reduce Tregs) [105] or chemoradiation [106], uncovering an interesting prognostic factor through
the correlation between induction of mesothelin-specific T-cell responses with improved overall
survival. Additionally, a phase II clinical trial that used GVAX in combination with CRS-207
(a live-attenuated strain of a Listeria monocytogenes–encoded mesothelin), to enhance both the innate
and adaptive immunity, showed improved overall survival [107]. Positive results for the vaccine
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 7 of 16

Algenpantucel-L have also been published in a phase II study [108] in combination with gemcitabine
or fluorouracil, leading to ongoing promising phase III clinical trials (IMPRESS and PILLAR trials).
Clinical trials with peptide vaccines instead of whole-cell vaccines have also been organized. A phase
I/II trial with K-Ras peptides in combination with GM-CSF was performed, with partial positive
responses [109]. Further evidence for the potential of using a Ras vaccine in pancreatic cancer was
demonstrated by a subsequent trials [110–112], with encouraging results and impressive 10-year
follow-ups. Interestingly, the GI-4000 vaccine (which triggers an immune response against mutated
Ras) has also drawn clinician’s attention [113]. The telomerase peptide vaccine (GV1001) showed
successful results in a phase I/II trial [114], although phase III clinical trials with chemotherapy
regimens have not been able to show a survival advantage [115]. Although different results have
been achieved depending on combinations, other peptide-based vaccines have also led to pancreatic
cancer patients inducing an antibody response but without achieving impressive results; these include
the MUC1 vaccines [116], anti-VEGFR vaccines [117,118], survivin [119], anti-gastrin [120], anti-heat
shock protein vaccine [121], and anti-WT-1 [122]. Dendritic cell vaccines are also under investigation
in pancreatic cancer clinical trials, highlighting carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)-loaded DCs [123],
mutated p53 and K-Ras loaded DCs [124], MUC1 [125], and WT-1 pulsed DCS [126]. Interestingly,
very recently publications have shown that therapy with DCs together with CIK (cytokine-induced
killer cells) and chemotherapy associates with increased immune responses, resulting in favorable
progression free
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 survival and OS [127]. 7 of 16

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Immunotherapy
Immunotherapy strategies
strategies that have been
that have been considered
considered inin PDA
PDA therapy.
therapy. Targeting
Targeting immune
immune
checkpoints, the use of vaccines, CAR T-cells or immune modulating molecules have
checkpoints, the use of vaccines, CAR T-cells or immune modulating molecules have been included been included
in pancreatic
in pancreatic cancer
cancer clinical
clinical trials.
trials. CEA:
CEA: carcinoembryonic
carcinoembryonic antigen;
antigen; Her2:
Her2: human
human epidermal
epidermal growth
growth
factor receptor 2; Muc-1: mucin-1; CD24: Cluster of differentiation 24; PSCA: prostate
factor receptor 2; Muc-1: mucin-1; CD24: Cluster of differentiation 24; PSCA: prostate stem cell antigen; stem cell
antigen; NK Rc: natural killer receptor; GM-CSF: granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating
NK Rc: natural killer receptor; GM-CSF: granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor; VEGFR: factor;
VEGFR: endothelial
vascular vascular endothelial growth
growth factor; factor;
HSP: heat HSP:
shockheat shock
protein; protein;
WT-1: WT-1:
Wilms tumorWilms tumorcytotoxic
1; CTLA4: 1; CTLA4:T
cytotoxic T lymphocyte–associated
lymphocyte–associated protein 4; protein 4; PD1: programmed
PD1: programmed cell
cell death death 1;
protein protein
PDL1:1;programmed
PDL1: programmed
death
death ligand-1;
ligand-1; CD40:CD40:
clustercluster of differentiation
of differentiation 40; CCR2:
40; CCR2: C-C motif
C-C motif chemokine
chemokine receptor
receptor 2. 2.

Therapeutic cancer vaccines using cancer cell antigens mixed with agents that stimulate patient
immune responses have shown impressive results in several tumors and are also in the spotlight in
pancreatic cancer clinical trials (Figure 1). For instance, GVAX (a GM-CSF vaccine) presented
favorable results in a phase I study [104] and phase II studies in combination with
cyclophosphamide (to reduce Tregs) [105] or chemoradiation [106], uncovering an interesting
prognostic factor through the correlation between induction of mesothelin-specific T-cell responses
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 8 of 16

Another strategy that is revolutionizing cancer immunotherapy is adoptive T-cell therapy,

in which autologous or allogenic tumor-specific cytotoxic T cells are infused into cancer patients
with the goal of recognizing, targeting, and destroying tumor cells. The most universal approach
is to using T cells that are genetically modified to express chimeric antigen receptors (CARs)
specific tumor-associated antigens (such as CEA, EGFR, Her2, MUC1, mesothelin, CD24, and PSCA).
This strategy has performed relatively well in pancreatic cancer preclinical studies [128–134].
However, taking the plunge to the clinic has not proven as successful, probably due to the tumor
immunosuppressive microenvironment, and neoadjuvant chemoradiation and combinations with
costimulators are now being explored (Figure 1). Interestingly, strategies have been designed to
enhance CAR T-cell therapy efficiency, such as reducing tumor bulk before adoptive cell therapy,
optimizing the Th2-to-Th1 ratio of infused CAR T-cells, pre-conditioning to deplete Tregs (by inhibiting
CTLA4, CD-25 targeting, TNFα agonism or combining with rosiglitazone), increasing CD8+ TILS
(with metformin or by inhibiting TGF-β), increasing macrophage activation (by targeting CSF1,
CCR2 or Bruton tyrosine kinase (BTK)) and even co-expressing albumin on the surface of CAR
T-cells (to enhance accumulation in the tumor) [134].
Considering that the strong immunosuppressive barrier is a handicap in pancreatic cancer therapy,
approaches with immune-modulating agents are also being considered in clinical trials (Figure 1).
A CD40 agonist antibody was combined with gemcitabine for treating 22 advanced PDA patients [61];
this achieved promising results and opens the door to a couple more clinical trials with CD40 agonist
and chemotherapy, with results yet to be published. In a similar context, inhibition of CCR2 to target
TAMs and monocytes in combination with folfirinox led to either stabilization of disease or partial
response in all of the patients who could be evaluated according to RECIST [135].
An interesting meta-analysis gathering all clinical trials with immunotherapies in pancreatic
cancer [136] found out that this strategy indeed significantly increases the 3-, 6-, 12-month and 3-year
OS of patients. Importantly, immunotherapy significantly increases the immune response of patients
with PDA and reduced CA19-9 levels.
In conclusion, a large effort to fit immunotherapy into pancreatic cancer therapies is being made
by companies and clinicians, but it is still far from being the panacea. The strong immunosuppressive
PDA microenvironment becomes a double-edged sword: on one hand, it makes immunotherapy
a reasonable option as a therapy, but on the other, it is, per se, a stumbling block rather than a stepping
stone that hinders very much its own efficiency. More sophisticated combinations and personalized
patient stratification will be necessary to achieve favorable outcomes and implement this as practical
therapy in the clinics.

7. Concluding Remarks
Pancreatic cancer has a complex molecular landscape that handicaps both research advances and
therapy efficiency. The strong immunosuppressive microenvironment in PDA, which mainly consists
of Tregs, macrophages, and MDSCs, blocks T effector cells, leading to immune evasion and rapid
tumor progression. Indeed, checkpoint monotherapies have failed in clinical trials due to this strong
immunological barrier. The main actor driving this process to bypass immune surveillance is a tangled
combination of chemokines and receptor-ligand signaling pathways, both in the tumor and the stroma,
and understanding this is critical to target the key regulators and allow immunotherapy to be efficient.
In this direction, basic research and preclinical trials with immunocompetent mice have shed some
light on the exact molecular mechanisms involved but are also raising concerns about the complexity
of the issue and the feasibility of deriving a combination that is suitable for a high percentage of
patients. Indeed, of the roughly a hundred clinical trials with immunotherapy in pancreatic cancer
that have been designed, none have achieved impressive results, although clearly some of the patients
have had with objective responses and may benefit from the therapies boosting their immune systems.
In this regard, new ultrasequencing data from cancer international consortiums have allowed human
pancreatic tumors to be classified according to their molecular signature; this has unveiled a new
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 9 of 16

immunogenic subtype that might be more sensitive to immunotherapy. Once again, it seems that we
are underestimating the heterogeneity of cancer disease, and that although economic issues cannot be
undervalued, the real solution will need to approach the issue through personalized medicine.

Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank Veronica A. Raker for English proofreading and manuscript
editing, and SMART (Servier Medical Art, http://smart.servier.com/) for providing images for figure preparation.
This work was supported by grants from the Spanish Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad/ ISCIII-FEDER
(PI14/00125; PI17/00199), the Carmen Delgado/Miguel Pérez-Mateo AESPANC-ACANPAN 2016 and the
“Generalitat de Catalunya” (2014/SGR/143) to Pilar Navarro.
Author Contributions: Neus Martinez-Bosch, Judith Vinaixa and Pilar Navarro wrote and revised the manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Hanahan, D.; Weinberg, R.A. Hallmarks of Cancer: The Next Generation. Cell 2011, 144, 646–674. [CrossRef]
2. Ehrlich, P. Über den jetzigen stand der Chemotherapie. Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. 1909, 42, 17–47. (In German)
[CrossRef]
3. Burnet, F.M. The concept of immunological surveillance. Prog. Exp. Tumor. Res. 1970, 13, 1–27. [PubMed]
4. Garrido, F.; Ruiz-Cabello, F.; Cabrera, T.; Pérez-Villar, J.J.; López-Botet, M.; Duggan-Keen, M.; Stern, P.L.
Implications for immunosurveillance of altered HLA class I phenotypes in human tumours. Immunol. Today
1997, 18, 89–95. [CrossRef]
5. Hicklin, D.J.; Marincola, F.M.; Ferrone, S. HLA class I antigen downregulation in human cancers: T-cell
immunotherapy revives an old story. Mol. Med. Today 1999, 5, 178–186. [CrossRef]
6. Johnsen, A.K.; Templeton, D.J.; Sy, M.; Harding, C.V. Deficiency of transporter for antigen presentation (TAP)
in tumor cells allows evasion of immune surveillance and increases tumorigenesis. J. Immunol. 1999, 163,
4224–4231. [PubMed]
7. Restifo, N.P.; Esquivel, F.; Kawakami, Y.; Yewdell, J.W.; Mulé, J.J.; Rosenberg, S.A.; Bennink, J.R. Identification
of human cancers deficient in antigen processing. J. Exp. Med. 1993, 177, 265–272. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
8. Rotem-Yehudar, R.; Groettrup, M.; Soza, A.; Kloetzel, P.M.; Ehrlich, R. LMP-associated proteolytic activities
and TAP-dependent peptide transport for class 1 MHC molecules are suppressed in cell lines transformed
by the highly oncogenic adenovirus 12. J. Exp. Med. 1996, 183, 499–514. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
9. Seliger, B.; Maeurer, M.J.; Ferrone, S. TAP off—Tumors on. Immunol. Today 1997, 18, 292–299. [PubMed]
10. Dunn, G.P.; Bruce, A.T.; Ikeda, H.; Old, L.J.; Schreiber, R.D. Cancer immunoediting: From immunosurveillance
to tumor escape. Nat. Immunol. 2002, 3, 991–998. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
11. Pasche, B. Role of transforming growth factor β in cancer. J. Cell. Physiol. 2001, 186, 153–168. [CrossRef]
12. Lind, M.H.; Rozell, B.; Wallin, R.P.A.; van Hogerlinden, M.; Ljunggren, H.-G.; Toftgård, R.; Sur, I. Tumor necrosis
factor receptor 1-mediated signaling is required for skin cancer development induced by NF-κB inhibition.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 4972–4977. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
13. Lin, E.Y.; Gouon-Evans, V.; Nguyen, A.V.; Pollard, J.W. The macrophage growth factor CSF-1 in mammary
gland development and tumor progression. J. Mammary Gland Biol. Neoplasia 2002, 7, 147–162. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
14. Fisher, D.T.; Appenheimer, M.M.; Evans, S.S. The two faces of IL-6 in the tumor microenvironment.
Semin. Immunol. 2014, 26, 38–47. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Matsuda, M.; Salazar, F.; Petersson, M.; Masucci, G.; Hansson, J.; Pisa, P.; Zhang, Q.-J.; Masucci, M.G.;
Kiessling, R. Interleukin 10 pretreatment protects target cells from tumor- and allo-specific cytotoxic T cells
and downregulates HLA class I expression. J. Exp. Med. 1994, 180, 2371–2376. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
16. Sotomayor, E.M.; Fu, Y.X.; Lopez-Cepero, M.; Herbert, L.; Jimenez, J.J.; Albarracin, C.; Lopez, D.M.
Role of tumor-derived cytokines on the immune system of mice bearing a mammary adenocarcinoma.
II. Down-regulation of macrophage-mediated cytotoxicity by tumor-derived granulocyte-macrophage
colony-stimulating factor. J. Immunol. 1991, 147, 2816–2823. [PubMed]
17. Gabrilovich, D. Mechanisms and functional significance of tumour-induced dendritic-cell defects.
Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2004, 4, 941–952. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 10 of 16

18. Gabrilovich, D.I.; Chen, H.L.; Girgis, K.R.; Cunningham, H.T.; Meny, G.M.; Nadaf, S.; Kavanaugh, D.;
Carbone, D.P. Production of vascular endothelial growth factor by human tumors inhibits the functional
maturation of dendritic cells. Nat. Med. 1996, 2, 1096–1103. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
19. Driessens, G.; Kline, J.; Gajewski, T.F. Costimulatory and coinhibitory receptors in anti-tumor immunity.
Immunol. Rev. 2009, 229, 126–144. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
20. Topalian, S.L.; Drake, C.G.; Pardoll, D.M. Targeting the PD-1/B7-H1(PD-L1) pathway to activate anti-tumor
immunity. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 2012, 24, 207–212. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
21. French, L.E.; Tschopp, J. Defective death receptor signaling as a cause of tumor immune escape.
Semin. Cancer Biol. 2002, 12, 51–55. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
22. Berraondo, P.; Minute, L.; Ajona, D.; Corrales, L.; Melero, I.; Pio, R. Innate immune mediators in cancer:
Between defense and resistance. Immunol. Rev. 2016, 274, 290–306. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
23. Jones, S.; Zhang, X.; Parsons, D.W.; Lin, J.C.; Leary, R.J.; Angenendt, P.; Mankoo, P.; Carter, H.; Kamiyama, H.;
Jimeno, A.; et al. Core signaling pathways in human pancreatic cancers revealed by global genomic analyses.
Science 2008, 321, 1801–1806. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
24. Biankin, A.V.; Waddell, N.; Kassahn, K.S.; Gingras, M.-C.; Muthuswamy, L.B.; Johns, A.L.; Miller, D.K.;
Wilson, P.J.; Patch, A.-M.; Wu, J.; et al. Pancreatic cancer genomes reveal aberrations in axon guidance
pathway genes. Nature 2012, 491, 399–405. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
25. Waddell, N.; Pajic, M.; Patch, A.-M.; Chang, D.K.; Kassahn, K.S.; Bailey, P.; Johns, A.L.; Miller, D.; Nones, K.;
Quek, K.; et al. Whole genomes redefine the mutational landscape of pancreatic cancer. Nature 2015, 518,
495–501. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
26. Witkiewicz, A.K.; McMillan, E.A.; Balaji, U.; Baek, G.; Lin, W.-C.; Mansour, J.; Mollaee, M.; Wagner, K.-U.;
Koduru, P.; Yopp, A.; et al. Whole-exome sequencing of pancreatic cancer defines genetic diversity and
therapeutic targets. Nat. Commun. 2015, 6, 6744. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
27. Bailey, P.; Chang, D.K.; Nones, K.; Johns, A.L.; Patch, A.-M.; Gingras, M.-C.; Miller, D.K.; Christ, A.N.;
Bruxner, T.J.C.; Quinn, M.C.; et al. Genomic analyses identify molecular subtypes of pancreatic cancer.
Nature 2016, 531, 47–52. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
28. Raphael, B.J.; Hruban, R.H.; Aguirre, A.J.; Moffitt, R.A.; Yeh, J.J.; Stewart, C.; Robertson, A.G.; Cherniack, A.D.;
Gupta, M.; Getz, G.; et al. Integrated Genomic Characterization of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.
Cancer Cell 2017, 32, 185–203.e13. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
29. Liyanage, U.K.; Moore, T.T.; Joo, H.-G.; Tanaka, Y.; Herrmann, V.; Doherty, G.; Drebin, J.A.; Strasberg, S.M.;
Eberlein, T.J.; Goedegebuure, P.S.; et al. Prevalence of regulatory T cells is increased in peripheral blood
and tumor microenvironment of patients with pancreas or breast adenocarcinoma. J. Immunol. 2002, 169,
2756–2761. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
30. Zhao, F.; Obermann, S.; von Wasielewski, R.; Haile, L.; Manns, M.P.; Korangy, F.; Greten, T.F. Increase in
frequency of myeloid-derived suppressor cells in mice with spontaneous pancreatic carcinoma. Immunology
2009, 128, 141–149. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
31. Amedei, A.; Niccolai, E.; Benagiano, M.; Della, B.C.; Cianchi, F.; Bechi, P.; Taddei, A.; Bencini, L.; Farsi, M.;
Cappello, P.; et al. Ex vivo analysis of pancreatic cancer-infiltrating T lymphocytes reveals that ENO-specific
Tregs accumulate in tumor tissue and inhibit Th1/Th17 effector cell functions. Cancer Immunol. Immunother.
2013, 62, 1249–1260. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
32. Ino, Y.; Yamazaki-Itoh, R.; Shimada, K.; Iwasaki, M.; Kosuge, T.; Kanai, Y.; Hiraoka, N. Immune cell
infiltration as an indicator of the immune microenvironment of pancreatic cancer. Br. J. Cancer 2013, 108,
914–923. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
33. Clark, C.E.; Hingorani, S.R.; Mick, R.; Combs, C.; Tuveson, D.A.; Vonderheide, R.H. Dynamics of the immune
reaction to pancreatic cancer from inception to invasion. Cancer Res. 2007. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
34. Tan, M.C.B.; Goedegebuure, P.S.; Belt, B.A.; Flaherty, B.; Sankpal, N.; Gillanders, W.E.; Eberlein, T.J.H.;
Chyi-Song, L.; David, C. Disruption of CCR5-dependent homing of regulatory T cells inhibits tumor growth
in a murine model of pancreatic cancer. J. Immunol. 2009, 182, 1746–1755. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Mitchem, J.B.; Brennan, D.J.; Knolhoff, B.L.; Belt, B.A.; Zhu, Y.; Sanford, D.E.; Belaygorod, L.; Carpenter, D.;
Collins, L.; Piwnica-Worms, D.; et al. Targeting tumor-infiltrating macrophages decreases tumor-initiating
cells, relieves immunosuppression, and improves chemotherapeutic responses. Cancer Res. 2013, 73,
1128–1141. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 11 of 16

36. Chen, L.; Flies, D.B. Molecular mechanisms of T cell co-stimulation and co-inhibition. Nat. Rev. Immunol.
2013, 13, 227–242. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
37. Saqib, R.; Noman, A.; Julio, C.C.; Mokenge, P.M.; Domenico, C.; Gregory, M.S.; Helm, J.; Kim, R.D. Expression
of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) in malignant and nonmalignant pancreatic tissue. J. Clin. Oncol.
2013, 31, 215.
38. Nomi, T.; Sho, M.; Akahori, T.; Hamada, K.; Kubo, A.; Kanehiro, H.; Nakamura, S.; Enomoto, K.;
Yagita, H.; Azuma, M.; et al. Clinical significance and therapeutic potential of the programmed death-1
ligand/programmed death-1 pathway in human pancreatic cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2007, 13, 2151–2157.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
39. Geng, L.; Huang, D.; Liu, J.; Qian, Y.; Deng, J.; Li, D.; Hu, Z.; Zhang, J.; Jiang, G.; Zheng, S.; et al. B7-H1
up-regulated expression in human pancreatic carcinoma tissue associates with tumor progression. J. Cancer
Res. Clin. Oncol. 2008, 134, 1021–1027. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
40. Song, X.; Liu, J.; Lu, Y.; Jin, H.; Huang, D. Overexpression of B7-H1 correlates with malignant cell proliferation
in pancreatic cancer. Oncol. Rep. 2014, 31, 1191–1198. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
41. Li, D.; Zhao, H.; Fei, M.; Wu, Y.; Wang, L.; Zhu, X.; Li, D. Expression of the co-signaling molecules
CD40-CD40L and their growth inhibitory effect on pancreatic cancer in vitro. Oncol. Rep. 2012, 28, 262–268.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
42. Lawrence, M.S.; Stojanov, P.; Polak, P.; Kryukov, G.V.; Cibulskis, K.; Sivachenko, A.; Carter, S.L.;
Stewart, C.; Mermel, C.H.; Roberts, S.A.; et al. Mutational heterogeneity in cancer and the search for
new cancer-associated genes. Nature 2013, 499, 214–218. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
43. Alexandrov, L.B.; Nik-Zainal, S.; Wedge, D.C.; Aparicio, S.A.J.R.; Behjati, S.; Biankin, A.V.; Bignell, G.R.;
Bolli, N.; Borg, A.; Børresen-Dale, A.-L.; et al. Signatures of mutational processes in human cancer. Nature
2013, 500, 415–421. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
44. Beatty, G.L.; Gladney, W.L. Immune escape mechanisms as a guide for cancer immunotherapy.
Clin. Cancer Res. 2015. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
45. Balachandran, V.P.; Łuksza, M.; Zhao, J.N.; Makarov, V.; Moral, J.A.; Remark, R.; Herbst, B.; Askan, G.;
Bhanot, U.; Senbabaoglu, Y.; et al. Identification of unique neoantigen qualities in long-term survivors of
pancreatic cancer. Nature 2017. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
46. Pardoll, D.M. The blockade of immune checkpoints in cancer immunotherapy. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2012, 12,
252–264. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
47. Melero, I.; Berman, D.M.; Aznar, M.A.; Korman, A.J.; Gracia, J.L.P.; Haanen, J. Evolving synergistic
combinations of targeted immunotherapies to combat cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2015, 15, 457–472. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
48. Odorizzi, P.M.; Wherry, E.J. Inhibitory receptors on lymphocytes: Insights from infections. J. Immunol. 2012,
188, 2957–2965. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
49. Peggs, K.S.; Quezada, S.A.; Chambers, C.A.; Korman, A.J.; Allison, J.P. 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, 1717–1725. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
50. Simpson, T.R.; Li, F.; Montalvo-Ortiz, W.; Sepulveda, M.A.; Bergerhoff, K.; Arce, F.; Roddie, C.; Henry, J.Y.;
Yagita, H.; Wolchok, J.D.; et al. Fc-dependent depletion of tumor-infiltrating regulatory T cells co-defines the
efficacy of anti-CTLA-4 therapy against melanoma. J. Exp. Med. 2013, 210, 1695–1710. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
51. Selby, M.J.; Engelhardt, J.J.; Quigley, M.; Henning, K.A.; Chen, T.; Srinivasan, M.; Korman, A.J. Anti-CTLA-4
Antibodies of IgG2a Isotype Enhance Antitumor Activity through Reduction of Intratumoral Regulatory T
Cells. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2013, 1, 32–42. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
52. Bengsch, F.; Knoblock, D.M.; Liu, A.; McAllister, F.; Beatty, G.L. CTLA-4/CD80 pathway regulates T cell
infiltration into pancreatic cancer. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2017, 66, 1609–1617. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
53. Brahmer, J.R.; Tykodi, S.S.; Chow, L.Q.M.; Hwu, W.-J.; Topalian, S.L.; Hwu, P.; Drake, C.G.; Camacho, L.H.;
Kauh, J.; Odunsi, K.; et al. Safety and activity of anti-PD-L1 antibody in patients with advanced cancer.
N. Engl. J. Med. 2012, 366, 2455–2465. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
54. Royal, R.E.; Levy, C.; Turner, K.; Mathur, A.; Hughes, M.; Kammula, U.S.; Sherry, R.M.; Topalian, S.L.;
Yang, J.C.; Lowy, I.; et al. Phase 2 trial of single agent Ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) for locally advanced or
metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J. Immunother. 2010, 33, 828–833. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 12 of 16

55. Le, D.T.; Lutz, E.; Uram, J.N.; Sugar, E.A.; Onners, B.; Solt, S.; Zheng, L.; Diaz, L.A., Jr.; Donehower, R.C.;
Jaffee, E.M.; et al. Evaluation of ipilimumab in combination with allogeneic pancreatic tumor cells transfected
with a GM-CSF gene in previously treated pancreatic cancer. J. Immunother. 2013, 36, 382–389. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
56. Winograd, R.; Byrne, K.T.; Evans, R.A.; Odorizzi, P.M.; Meyer, A.R.L.; Bajor, D.L.; Clendenin, C.; Stanger, B.Z.;
Furth, E.E.; Wherry, E.J.; et al. Induction of T-cell Immunity Overcomes Complete Resistance to PD-1 and
CTLA-4 Blockade and Improves Survival in Pancreatic Carcinoma. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2015. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
57. Sandin, L.C.; Eriksson, F.; Ellmark, P.; Loskog, A.S.; Tötterman, T.H.; Mangsbo, S.M. Local CTLA4
blockade effectively restrains experimental pancreatic adenocarcinoma growth in vivo. Oncoimmunology
2014, 3, e27614. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
58. Corbett, T.H.; Roberts, B.J.; Leopold, W.R.; Peckham, J.C.; Wilkoff, L.J.; Griswold, D.P.; Schabel, F.M. Induction
and chemotherapeutic response of two transplantable ductal adenocarcinomas of the pancreas in C57BL/6
mice. Cancer Res. 1984, 44, 717–726. [PubMed]
59. Lu, C.; Paschall, A.V.; Shi, H.; Savage, N.; Waller, J.L.; Sabbatini, M.E.; Oberlies, N.H.; Pearce, C.; Liu, K.
The MLL1-H3K4me3 Axis-Mediated PD-L1 Expression and Pancreatic Cancer Immune Evasion. J. Natl.
Cancer Inst. 2017, 109, djw283. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
60. Okudaira, K.; Hokari, R.; Tsuzuki, Y.; Okada, Y.; Komoto, S.; Watanabe, C.; Kurihara, C.; Kawaguchi, A.;
Nagao, S.; Azuma, M.; et al. Blockade of B7-H1 or B7-DC induces an anti-tumor effect in a mouse pancreatic
cancer model. Int. J. Oncol. 2009, 35, 741–749. [PubMed]
61. Beatty, G.L.; Torigian, D.A.; Chiorean, E.G.; Saboury, B.; Brothers, A.; Alavi, A.; Troxel, A.B.; Sun, W.;
Teitelbaum, U.R.; Vonderheide, R.H.; et al. A Phase I Study of an Agonist CD40 Monoclonal Antibody
(CP-870,893) in Combination with Gemcitabine in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Ductal
Adenocarcinoma. Clin. Cancer Res. 2013, 19, 6286–6295. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
62. Barondes, S.H.; Castronovo, V.; Cooper, D.N.; Cummings, R.D.; Drickamer, K.; Feizi, T.; Gitt, M.A.;
Hirabayashi, J.; Hughes, C.; Kasai, K.; et al. Galectins: A family of animal beta-galactoside-binding lectins.
Cell 1994, 76, 597–598. [CrossRef]
63. Leffler, H.; Carlsson, S.; Hedlund, M.; Qian, Y.; Poirier, F. Introduction to galectins. Glycoconj. J. 2002, 19,
433–440. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
64. Cerliani, J.P.; Blidner, A.G.; Toscano, M.A.; Croci, D.O.; Rabinovich, G.A. Translating the “Sugar Code” into
Immune and Vascular Signaling Programs. Trends Biochem. Sci. 2017, 42, 255–273. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
65. Cooper, D.N.W. Galectinomics: Finding themes in complexity. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2002, 1572, 209–231.
[CrossRef]
66. Liu, F.T.; Rabinovich, G.A. Galectins as modulators of tumour progression. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2005, 5, 29–41.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
67. Hughes, R.C. Secretion of the galectin family of mammalian carbohydrate-binding proteins. Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1999, 1473, 172–185. [CrossRef]
68. Demydenko, D.; Berest, I. Expression of galectin-1 in malignant tumors. Exp. Oncol. 2009, 31, 74–79. [PubMed]
69. Croci, D.O.; Salatino, M.; Rubinstein, N.; Cerliani, J.P.; Cavallin, L.E.; Leung, H.J.; Ouyang, J.; Ilarregui, J.M.;
Toscano, M.A.; Domaica, C.I.; et al. Disrupting galectin-1 interactions with n-glycans suppresses
hypoxia-driven angiogenesis and tumorigenesis in kaposi’s sarcoma. J. Exp. Med. 2012, 209, 1985–2000.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
70. Croci, D.O.; Cerliani, J.P.; Dalotto-Moreno, T.; Méndez-Huergo, S.P.; Mascanfroni, I.D.; Dergan-Dylon, S.;
Toscano, M.A.; Caramelo, J.J.; García-Vallejo, J.J.; Ouyang, J.; et al. Glycosylation-dependent lectin-receptor
interactions preserve angiogenesis in anti-VEGF refractory tumors. Cell 2014, 156, 744–758. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
71. Espelt, M.V.; Croci, D.O.; Bacigalupo, M.L.; Carabias, P.; Manzi, M.; Elola, M.T.; Munoz, M.C.; Dominici, F.P.;
Wolfenstein-Todel, C.; Rabinovich, G.A.; et al. Novel roles of galectin-1 in hepatocellular carcinoma cell
adhesion, polarization, and in vivo tumor growth. Hepatology 2011, 53, 2097–2106. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
72. Thijssen, V.L.; Barkan, B.; Shoji, H.; Aries, I.M.; Mathieu, V.; Deltour, L.; Hackeng, T.M.; Kiss, R.; Kloog, Y.;
Poirier, F.; et al. Tumor cells secrete galectin-1 to enhance endothelial cell activity. Cancer Res. 2010, 70,
6216–6224. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 13 of 16

73. Bacigalupo, M.L.; Manzi, M.; Espelt, M.V.; Gentilini, L.D.; Compagno, D.; Laderach, D.J.; Wolfenstein-Todel, C.;
Rabinovich, G.A.; Troncoso, M.F. Galectin-1 Triggers Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in Human
Hepatocellular Carcinoma Cells. J. Cell. Physiol. 2015, 230, 1298–1309. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
74. Rabinovich, G.; Ramhorst, R.; Rubinstein, N.; Corigliano, A.; Daroqui, M.; Kier-Joffe, E.; Fainboim, L.
Induction of allogenic t-cell hyporesponsiveness by galectin-1-mediated apoptotic and non-apoptotic
mechanisms. Cell Death Differ. 2002, 9, 661–670. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
75. He, J.; Baum, L.G. Presentation of galectin-1 by extracellular matrix triggers T cell death. J. Biol. Chem. 2004,
279, 4705–4712. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
76. Méndez-Huergo, S.P.; Blidner, A.G.; Rabinovich, G.A. Galectins: Emerging regulatory checkpoints linking
tumor immunity and angiogenesis. Curr. Opin. Immunol. 2017, 45, 8–15. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
77. Rabinovich, G.A.; Conejo-García, J.R. Shaping the Immune Landscape in Cancer by Galectin-Driven
Regulatory Pathways. J. Mol. Biol. 2016, 428, 3266–3281. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
78. Tang, D.; Yuan, Z.; Xue, X.; Lu, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, H.; Chen, M.; An, Y.; Wei, J.; Zhu, Y.; et al.
High expression of Galectin-1 in pancreatic stellate cells plays a role in the development and maintenance of
an immunosuppressive microenvironment in pancreatic cancer. Int. J. Cancer 2012, 130, 2337–2348. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
79. Martínez-Bosch, N.; Fernández-Barrena, M.G.; Moreno, M.; Ortiz-Zapater, E.; Munné-Collado, J.; Iglesias, M.;
André, S.; Gabius, H.-J.; Hwang, R.F.; Poirier, F.; et al. Galectin-1 Drives Pancreatic Carcinogenesis through
Stroma Remodeling and Hedgehog Signaling Activation. Cancer Res. 2014, 74, 3512–3524. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
80. Martínez-Bosch, N.; Navarro, P. Targeting Galectin-1 in pancreatic cancer: Immune surveillance on guard.
Oncoimmunology 2014, 3, e952201. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
81. Martínez-Bosch, N.; Navarro, P. Galectin-1 as a therapeutic target in pancreatic cancer: The tumor stroma in
the spotlight. Cancer Cell Microenviron. 2014, 1, 1–6. [CrossRef]
82. Sano, H.; Hsu, D.K.; Yu, L.; Apgar, J.R.; Kuwabara, I.; Yamanaka, T.; Hirashima, M.; Liu, F.-T.; et al. Human
galectin-3 is a novel chemoattractant for monocytes and macrophages. J. Immunol. 2000, 165, 2156–2164.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
83. Demetriou, M.; Granovsky, M.; Quaggin, S.; Dennis, J.W. Negative regulation of T-cell activation and
autoimmunity by Mgat5 N-glycosylation. Nature 2001, 409, 733–739. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
84. Acosta-Rodríguez, E.V.; Montes, C.L.; Motrán, C.C.; Zuniga, E.I.; Liu, F.-T.; Rabinovich, G.A.; Gruppi, A.; et al.
Galectin-3 mediates IL-4-induced survival and differentiation of B cells: Functional cross-talk and
implications during Trypanosoma cruzi infection. J. Immunol. 2004, 172, 493–502. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
85. Demotte, N.; Wieërs, G.; Van Der Smissen, P.; Moser, M.; Schmidt, C.; Thielemans, K.; Squifflet, J.-L.;
Weynand, B.; Carrasco, J.; Lurquin, C.; et al. A Galectin-3 Ligand Corrects the Impaired Function of Human
CD4 and CD8 Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes and Favors Tumor Rejection in Mice. Cancer Res. 2010, 70,
7476–7488. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
86. Kouo, T.; Huang, L.; Pucsek, A.B.; Cao, M.; Solt, S.; Armstrong, T.; Jaffee, E. Galectin-3 Shapes Antitumor
Immune Responses by Suppressing CD8+ T Cells via LAG-3 and Inhibiting Expansion of Plasmacytoid
Dendritic Cells. Cancer Immunol. Res. 2015, 3, 412–423. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
87. Zhu, C.; Anderson, A.C.; Schubart, A.; Xiong, H.; Imitola, J.; Khoury, S.J.; Zheng, X.X.; Strom, T.B.;
Kuchroo, V.K. The Tim-3 ligand galectin-9 negatively regulates T helper type 1 immunity. Nat. Immunol.
2005, 6, 1245–1252. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
88. Topalian, S.L.; Drake, C.G.; Pardoll, D.M. Immune checkpoint blockade: A common denominator approach
to cancer therapy. Cancer Cell 2015, 27, 450–461. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
89. Daley, D.; Mani, V.R.; Mohan, N.; Akkad, N.; Ochi, A.; Heindel, D.W.; Lee, K.B.; Zambirinis, C.P.;
Pandian, G.S.B.; Savadkar, S.; et al. Dectin 1 activation on macrophages by galectin 9 promotes pancreatic
carcinoma and peritumoral immune tolerance. Nat. Med. 2017. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
90. Feig, C.; Gopinathan, A.; Neesse, A.; Chan, D.S.; Cook, N.; Tuveson, D.A. The pancreas cancer
microenvironment. Clin. Cancer Res. 2013, 18, 4266–4276. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
91. Luheshi, N.M.; Coates-Ulrichsen, J.; Harper, J.; Mullins, S.; Sulikowski, M.G.; Martin, P.; Brown, L.; Lewis, A.;
Davies, G.; Morrow, M.; et al. Transformation of the tumour microenvironment by a CD40 agonist antibody
correlates with improved responses to PD-L1 blockade in a mouse orthotopic pancreatic tumour model.
Oncotarget 2016, 7, 18508–18520. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 14 of 16

92. Steele, C.W.; Karim, S.A.; Leach, J.D.; Bailey, P.; Upstill-Goddard, R.; Rishi, L.; Foth, M.; Bryson, S.; McDaid, K.;
Wilson, Z.; et al. CXCR2 Inhibition Profoundly Suppresses Metastases and Augments Immunotherapy in
Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Cancer Cell 2016, 29, 832–845. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
93. Mace, T.A.; Shakya, R.; Pitarresi, J.R.; Swanson, B.; McQuinn, C.W.; Loftus, S.; Nordquist, E.; Cruz-Monserrate, Z.;
Yu, L.; Young, G.; et al. IL-6 and PD-L1 antibody blockade combination therapy reduces tumour progression
in murine models of pancreatic cancer. Gut 2016. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
94. Lu, C.; Talukder, A.; Savage, N.M.; Singh, N.; Liu, K. JAK-STAT-mediated chronic inflammation impairs
cytotoxic T lymphocyte activation to decrease anti-PD-1 immunotherapy efficacy in pancreatic cancer.
OncoImmunology 2017, e1291106. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
95. Zheng, W.; Skowron, K.B.; Namm, J.P.; Burnette, B.; Fernandez, C.; Arina, A.; Liang, H.; Spiotto, M.T.;
Posner, M.C.; Fu, Y.-X.; et al. Combination of radiotherapy and vaccination overcomes checkpoint blockade
resistance. Oncotarget 2016, 7, 43039–43051. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
96. Azad, A.; Lim, S.Y.; D’Costa, Z.; Jones, K.; Diana, A.; Sansom, O.J.; Kruger, P.; Liu, S.; McKenna, W.G.;
Dushek, O.; et al. PD-L1 blockade enhances response of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to radiotherapy.
EMBO Mol. Med. 2017, 9, 167–180. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
97. Mahoney, K.M.; Rennert, P.D.; Freeman, G.J. Combination cancer immunotherapy and new immunomodulatory
targets. Nat. Rev. Drug. Discov. 2015, 14, 561–584. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
98. Soares, K.C.; Rucki, A.A.; Wu, A.A.; Olino, K.; Xiao, Q.; Chai, Y.; Wamwea, A.; Bigelow, E.; Lutz, E.; Liu, L.; et al.
PD-1/PD-L1 blockade together with vaccine therapy facilitates effector T-cell infiltration into pancreatic
tumors. J. Immunother. 2015, 38, 1–11. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
99. Allen, E.; Jabouille, A.; Rivera, L.B.; Lodewijckx, I.; Missiaen, R.; Steri, V.; Feyen, K.; Tawney, J.; Hanahan, D.;
Michael, I.P.; et al. Combined antiangiogenic and anti–PD-L1 therapy stimulates tumor immunity through
HEV formation. Sci. Transl. Med. 2017, 9, eaak9679. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
100. Aglietta, M.; Barone, C.; Sawyer, M.; Moore, M.; Miller, W., Jr.; Bagalà, C.; Colombi, F.; Cagnazzo, C.;
Gioeni, L.; Wang, E.; et al. A phase I dose escalation trial of tremelimumab (CP-675,206) in combination
with gemcitabine in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Ann. Oncol. 2014, 25,
1750–1755. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
101. Weiss, G.J.; Waypa, J.; Blaydorn, L.; Coats, J.; McGahey, K.; Sangal, A.; Niu, J.; Lynch, C.A.; Farley, J.H.;
Khemka, V.; et al. A phase Ib study of pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced cancer
(PembroPlus). Br. J. Cancer 2017, 117, 33–40. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
102. Weiss, G.J.; Blaydorn, L.; Beck, J.; Bornemann-Kolatzki, K.; Urnovitz, H.; Schütz, E.; Khemka, V. Phase
Ib/II study of gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, and pembrolizumab in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
Investig. New Drugs 2017. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
103. Li, X.; Hu, W.; Zheng, X.; Zhang, C.; Du, P.; Zheng, Z.; Yang, Y.; Wu, J.; Ji, M.; Jiang, J.; et al. Emerging
immune checkpoints for cancer therapy. Acta Oncol. 2015, 54, 1706–1713. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
104. Jaffee, E.M.; Hruban, R.H.; Biedrzycki, B.; Laheru, D.; Schepers, K.; Sauter, P.R.; Goemann, M.; Coleman, J.;
Grochow, L.; Donehower, R.C.; et al. Novel allogeneic granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating
factor-secreting tumor vaccine for pancreatic cancer: A phase I trial of safety and immune activation.
J. Clin. Oncol. 2001, 19, 145–156. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
105. Laheru, D.; Lutz, E.; Burke, J.; Biedrzycki, B.; Solt, S.; Onners, B.; Tartakovsky, I.; Nemunaitis, J.;
Le, D.; Sugar, E.; et al. Allogeneic granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor-secreting tumor
immunotherapy alone or in sequence with cyclophosphamide for metastatic pancreatic cancer: A pilot study
of safety, feasibility, and immune activation. Clin. Cancer Res. 2008, 14, 1455–1463. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
106. Lutz, E.; Yeo, C.J.; Lillemoe, K.D.; Biedrzycki, B.; Kobrin, B.; Herman, J.; Sugar, E.; Piantadosi, S.;
Cameron, J.L.; Solt, S.; et al. A lethally irradiated allogeneic granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating
factor-secreting tumor vaccine for pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A Phase II trial of safety, efficacy, and immune
activation. Ann. Surg. 2011, 253, 328–335. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
107. Le, D.T.; Wang-Gillam, A.; Picozzi, V.; Greten, T.F.; Crocenzi, T.; Springett, G.; Morse, M.; Zeh, H.; Cohen, D.;
Fine, R.L.; et al. Safety and survival with GVAX pancreas prime and Listeria Monocytogenes-expressing
mesothelin (CRS-207) boost vaccines for metastatic pancreatic cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 2015, 33, 1325–1333.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 15 of 16

108. Hardacre, J.M.; Mulcahy, M.; Small, W.; Talamonti, M.; Obel, J.; Krishnamurthi, S.; Rocha-Lima, C.S.;
Safran, H.; Lenz, H.-J.; Chiorean, E.G.; et al. Addition of Algenpantucel-L Immunotherapy to Standard
Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer: A Phase 2 Study. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2013, 17, 94–101. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
109. Gjertsen, M.K.; Buanes, T.; Rosseland, A.R.; Bakka, A.; Gladhaug, I.; Søreide, O.; Eriksen, J.A.; Møller, M.;
Baksaas, I.; Lothe, R.A.; et al. Intradermal ras peptide vaccination with granulocyte-macrophage
colony-stimulating factor as adjuvant: Clinical and immunological responses in patients with pancreatic
adenocarcinoma. Int. J. cancer 2001, 92, 441–450. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
110. Toubaji, A.; Achtar, M.; Provenzano, M.; Herrin, V.E.; Behrens, R.; Hamilton, M.; Bernstein, S.; Venzon, D.;
Gause, B.; Marincola, F.; et al. Pilot study of mutant ras peptide-based vaccine as an adjuvant treatment in
pancreatic and colorectal cancers. Cancer Immunol. Immunother. 2008, 57, 1413–1420. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
111. Abou-Alfa, G.K.; Chapman, P.B.; Feilchenfeldt, J.; Brennan, M.F.; Capanu, M.; Gansukh, B.; Jacobs, G.;
Levin, A.; Neville, D.; Kelsen, D.P.; et al. Targeting mutated K-ras in pancreatic adenocarcinoma using an
adjuvant vaccine. Am. J. Clin. Oncol. 2011, 34, 321–325. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
112. Wedén, S.; Klemp, M.; Gladhaug, I.P.; Møller, M.; Eriksen, J.A.; Gaudernack, G.; Buanes, T. Long-term
follow-up of patients with resected pancreatic cancer following vaccination against mutant K-ras.
Int. J. Cancer 2011, 128, 1120–1128. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
113. Hartley, M.L.; Bade, N.A.; Prins, P.A.; Ampie, L.; Marshall, J.L. Pancreatic cancer, treatment options, and
GI-4000. Hum. Vaccin. Immunother. 2015, 11, 931–937. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
114. Bernhardt, S.; Gjertsen, M.; Trachsel, S.; Møller, M.; Eriksen, J.; Meo, M.; Buanes, T.; Gaudernack, G.
Telomerase peptide vaccination of patients with non-resectable pancreatic cancer: A dose escalating phase
I/II study. Br. J. Cancer 2006, 95, 1474–1482. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
115. Middleton, G.; Silcocks, P.; Cox, T.; Valle, J.; Wadsley, J.; Propper, D.; Coxon, F.; Ross, P.; Madhusudan, S.;
Roques, T.; et al. Gemcitabine and capecitabine with or without telomerase peptide vaccine GV1001 in
patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer (TeloVac): An open-label, randomised,
phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014, 15, 829–840. [CrossRef]
116. Lepisto, A.J.; Moser, A.J.; Zeh, H.; Lee, K.; Bartlett, D.; McKolanis, J.R.; Geller, B.A.; Schmotzer, A.; Potter, D.P.;
Whiteside, T.; et al. A phase I/II study of a MUC1 peptide pulsed autologous dendritic cell vaccine as
adjuvant therapy in patients with resected pancreatic and biliary tumors. Cancer Ther. 2008, 6, 955–964.
[PubMed]
117. Miyazawa, M.; Ohsawa, R.; Tsunoda, T.; Hirono, S.; Kawai, M.; Tani, M.; Nakamura, Y.; Yamaue, H. Phase I
clinical trial using peptide vaccine for human vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 in combination
with gemcitabine for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Cancer Sci. 2010, 101, 433–439. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
118. Suzuki, N.; Hazama, S.; Iguchi, H.; Uesugi, K.; Tanaka, H.; Hirakawa, K.; Aruga, A.; Hatori, T.; Ishizaki, H.;
Umeda, Y.; et al. Phase II clinical trial of peptide cocktail therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic
cancer: VENUS-PC study. Cancer Sci. 2017, 108, 73–80. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
119. Mehrotra, S.; Britten, C.D.; Chin, S.; Garrett-Mayer, E.; Cloud, C.A.; Li, M.; Scurti, G.; Salem, M.L.;
Nelson, M.H.; Thomas, M.B.; et al. Vaccination with poly(IC:LC) and peptide-pulsed autologous dendritic
cells in patients with pancreatic cancer. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2017, 10, 82. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
120. Gilliam, A.D.; Broome, P.; Topuzov, E.G.; Garin, A.M.; Pulay, I.; Humphreys, J.; Whitehead, A.; Takhar, A.;
Rowlands, B.J.; Beckingham, I.J.; et al. An international multicenter randomized controlled trial of G17DT in
patients with pancreatic cancer. Pancreas 2012, 41, 374–379. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
121. Maki, R.G.; Livingston, P.O.; Lewis, J.J.; Janetzki, S.; Klimstra, D.; DeSantis, D.; Srivastava, P.K.; Brennan, M.F.
A phase I pilot study of autologous heat shock protein vaccine HSPPC-96 in patients with resected pancreatic
adenocarcinoma. Dig. Dis. Sci. 2007, 52, 1964–1972. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
122. Koido, S.; Okamoto, M.; Shimodaira, S.; Sugiyama, H. Wilms’ tumor 1 (WT1)-targeted cancer vaccines to
extend survival for patients with pancreatic cancer. Immunotherapy 2016, 8, 1309–1320. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
123. Morse, M.A.; Nair, S.K.; Boczkowski, D.; Tyler, D.; Hurwitz, H.I.; Proia, A.; Clay, T.M.; Schlom, J.; Gilboa, E.;
Lyerly, H.K.; et al. The feasibility and safety of immunotherapy with dendritic cells loaded with CEA mRNA
following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and resection of pancreatic cancer. Int. J. Gastrointest. Cancer
2002, 32, 1–6. [CrossRef]
Cancers 2018, 10, 6 16 of 16

124. Carbone, D.P.; Ciernik, I.F.; Kelley, M.J.; Smith, M.C.; Nadaf, S.; Kavanaugh, D.; Maher, V.E.; Stipanov, M.;
Contois, D.; Johnson, B.E.; et al. Immunization with mutant p53- and K-ras-derived peptides in cancer
patients: Immune response and clinical outcome. J. Clin. Oncol. 2005, 23, 5099–5107. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
125. Kondo, H.; Hazama, S.; Kawaoka, T.; Yoshino, S.; Yoshida, S.; Tokuno, K.; Takashima, M.; Ueno, T.; Hinoda, Y.;
Oka, M.; et al. Adoptive immunotherapy for pancreatic cancer using MUC1 peptide-pulsed dendritic cells
and activated T lymphocytes. Anticancer Res. 2008, 28, 379–387. [PubMed]
126. Koido, S.; Homma, S.; Okamoto, M.; Takakura, K.; Mori, M.; Yoshizaki, S.; Tsukinaga, S.; Odahara, S.;
Koyama, S.; Imazu, H.; et al. Treatment with chemotherapy and dendritic cells pulsed with multiple Wilms’
tumor 1 (WT1)-specific MHC class I/II-restricted epitopes for pancreatic cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2014, 20,
4228–4239. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
127. Jiang, N.; Qiao, G.; Wang, X.-L.; Morse, M.A.; Gwin, W.R.; Zhou, L.; Song, Y.; Zhao, Y.; Chen, F.; Zhou, X.-N.;
et al. Dendritic Cell/Cytokine-Induced Killer Cell Immunotherapy Combined with S-1 in Patients with
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Prospective Study. Clin. Cancer Res. 2017, 23, 5066–5073. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
128. Chmielewski, M.; Hahn, O.; Rappl, G.; Nowak, M.; Schmidt–Wolf, I.H.; Hombach, A.A.; Abken, H. T Cells
That Target Carcinoembryonic Antigen Eradicate Orthotopic Pancreatic Carcinomas Without Inducing
Autoimmune Colitis in Mice. Gastroenterology 2012, 143, 1095.e2–1107.e2. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
129. Maliar, A.; Servais, C.; Waks, T.; Chmielewski, M.; Lavy, R.; Altevogt, P.; Abken, H.; Eshhar, Z.
Redirected T cells that target pancreatic adenocarcinoma antigens eliminate tumors and metastases in
mice. Gastroenterology 2012, 143, 1375–1384. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
130. Posey, A.D.; Schwab, R.D.; Boesteanu, A.C.; Steentoft, C.; Mandel, U.; Engels, B.; Stone, J.D.; Madsen, T.D.;
Schreiber, K.; Haines, K.M.; et al. Engineered CAR T Cells Targeting the Cancer-Associated Tn-Glycoform of
the Membrane Mucin MUC1 Control Adenocarcinoma. Immunity 2016, 44, 1444–1454. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
131. Zhao, Y.; Moon, E.; Carpenito, C.; Paulos, C.M.; Liu, X.; Brennan, A.L.; Chew, A.; Carroll, R.G.; Scholler, J.;
Levine, B.L.; et al. Multiple injections of electroporated autologous T cells expressing a chimeric antigen
receptor mediate regression of human disseminated tumor. Cancer Res. 2010, 70, 9053–9061. [CrossRef]
[PubMed]
132. Abate-Daga, D.; Lagisetty, K.H.; Tran, E.; Zheng, Z.; Gattinoni, L.; Yu, Z.; Burns, W.R.; Miermont, A.M.;
Teper, Y.; Rudloff, U.; et al. A novel chimeric antigen receptor against prostate stem cell antigen mediates
tumor destruction in a humanized mouse model of pancreatic cancer. Hum. Gene Ther. 2014, 25, 1003–1012.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
133. Tal, Y.; Yaakobi, S.; Horovitz-Fried, M.; Safyon, E.; Rosental, B.; Porgador, A.; Cohen, C.J. An NCR1-based
chimeric receptor endows T-cells with multiple anti-tumor specificities. Oncotarget 2014, 5, 10949–10958.
[CrossRef] [PubMed]
134. DeSelm, C.J.; Tano, Z.E.; Varghese, A.M.; Adusumilli, P.S. CAR T-cell therapy for pancreatic cancer.
J. Surg. Oncol. 2017. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
135. Nywening, T.M.; Wang-Gillam, A.; Sanford, D.E.; Belt, B.A.; Panni, R.Z.; Cusworth, B.M.; Toriola, A.T.;
Nieman, R.K.; Worley, L.A.; Yano, M.; et al. Targeting tumour-associated macrophages with CCR2 inhibition
in combination with FOLFIRINOX in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic
cancer: A single-centre, open-label, dose-finding, non-randomised, phase 1b trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016, 17,
651–662. [CrossRef]
136. Chen, J.; Xiao-Zhong, G.; Qi, X.-S. Clinical Outcomes of Specific Immunotherapy in Advanced Pancreatic
Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J. Immunol. Res. 2017. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).