This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
BACKGROUND: Our team has previously found that the stimulator of interferon genes (STING) plays a more significant anti-tumor role in host immune cells than in tumor cells. Although STING is necessary for CD8 + T cells to exert immunological activity, its effect on CD8 + T cells remains debatable. In this study, we used both in vitro and in vivo models to explore the metabolic effects of STING on CD8 + T cells. METHODS: Peripheral blood lymphocytes were procured from non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving anti-PD-1 therapy to investigate the correlation between STING expression levels, CD8 + T-cell subsets, and immunotherapy efficacy. STING knockout (STING-KO) mice were used for in vivo studies. RNA-seq, seahorse, flow cytometry, electron microscopy, qPCR, immunofluorescence, western blotting, and immunoprecipitation were performed to explore the underlying mechanisms of STING in regulating CD8 + T cell function. RESULTS: We discovered that the expression level of STING in immune cells exhibited a significant correlation with immunotherapy efficacy, as well as with the proportion of central memory CD8 + T cells. Moreover, we found that the loss of the STING gene results in a reduction in the number of mitochondria and a change in the metabolic pathway selection, thereby inducing excessive glycolysis in CD8 + T cells. This excessive glycolysis generates high levels of lactate, which further inhibits IFN-γ secretion and impacts memory T cell differentiation. Correcting the glycolysis disorder partially restored function and IFN-γ secretion, rescued the central memory CD8 + T subset, and improved immunotherapy in STING-KO mice. This provides a new treatment strategy for patients with low STING expression and a poor response to immunotherapy. CONCLUSION: Intrinsic STING of CD8 + T cells affects their function through the HK2/Lactate/IFN-γ axis and affects memory differentiation by regulating glycolysis.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Xu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: