Skip to main content
F1000Research logoLink to F1000Research
. 2018 Sep 26;7:F1000 Faculty Rev-1558. [Version 1] doi: 10.12688/f1000research.14793.1

Recent advances in understanding dendritic cell development, classification, and phenotype

Andreas Schlitzer 1,a, Wei Zhang 2, Mei Song 3, Xiaojing Ma 3,4,b
PMCID: PMC6173131  PMID: 30345015

Abstract

Dendritic cells (DCs) play an essential role in the induction of adaptive immune responses against infectious agents and in the generation of tolerance to self-antigens. In this mini-review, we summarize new evidence suggesting that the tissue of residence significantly shapes the last developmental steps of DCs into locally adapted cellular entities, enabling them to perform tissue-specific tasks while maintaining the core DC properties. We also discuss recent advances that have highlighted DCs’ rather complex phenotypic and functional heterogeneity in the tumor microenvironment, based on their physical characteristics, such as activation status, maturity, and polarization, illustrating a key role for DCs in the induction of anti-tumor immunity.

Keywords: dendritic cell, development, differentiation, heterogeneity, tumor microinvironment, immunity, tolerance

Dendritic cell development

Dendritic cells (DCs) have been progressively recognized as a separate hematopoietic lineage of myeloid cells, alongside granulocytes, macrophages, and monocytes. DC development is dependent on a cascade of bone marrow-resident hematopoietic stem cell (HSC)-derived precursor and progenitor cells. The first progenitor which has lost the potential to give rise to any other cell type except DCs is the common DC progenitor (CDP) 14. The recent development of sophisticated methods 5 combined with the generation of refined mouse models for the conditional deletion of genes in DCs or the specific ablation of DCs or DC subsets 6 has helped to dissect the heterogeneity of DCs with respect to their developmental path, phenotype, localization, lineages, and function.

CDPs are characterized by high expression of Fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) alongside expression of colony-stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF-1R) while retaining only an intermediate to low expression of the stem cell antigen kit. Furthermore, CDPs express high levels of interferon (IFN) regulatory factor 8 (IRF8), and their survival and continued development are critically dependent on this transcription factor 7. Additionally, CDPs express certain other stem cell-related transcripts such as cbfb and Runx 1 and 3 alongside Krüppel-like factor 4 (KLF4) and transcription factor 4 (TCF4) 8. CDPs gradually mature into pre-DCs 9. Pre-DCs can be identified by their high expression of FLT3 and CD11c and their intermediate to low expression of major histocompatibility complex II (MHC II). Interestingly, a subset of pre-DCs expresses the transcription factor Zbtb46 10 and Siglec H 11. Further investigation into the heterogeneity within the pre-DC fraction leads to the identification of DC subset-committed pre-DCs. Subset-committed pre-DCs can be separated into four functionally and transcriptomically different subsets by using the surface markers Ly6c and Siglec H 8 or alternatively CD117 and Zbtb46 expression 10. Developmentally, four functionally and transcriptionally separate maturation stages of pre-DCs can be identified. Siglec H + Ly6c pre-DCs are the developmentally earliest cells differentiating as CDP progeny. These cells still harbor the potential to give rise to conventional DCs (cDCs) that leave the bone marrow as precursors and plasmacytoid DCs (pDCs) that leave the bone marrow to go to the lymphoid organs and peripheral blood upon completing development 12. The consensus on the three major populations of murine DCs is that they are independently controlled by unique masters of transcriptional regulation 13 and bear these differential markers: conventional type 1 DCs (cDC1s) – CD8α + (lymphoid) and CD103 + (tissue), BATF3 and IRF8 dependent; conventional type 2 DCs (cDC2s) – CD11b + and CD172a +, IRF4 dependent; and pDCs – IFNα-secreting, E2-2 dependent 14.

The potential to give rise to pDC progeny is lost upon maturing to the Siglec H + Ly6c + stage, as in vitro and in vivo differentiation assays clearly indicated only cDC progeny. Siglec H + Ly6c + pre-DCs differentiate under yet-unknown cues into two subsets: pre-cDC1, which specifically give rise to cDC1 in peripheral tissues, and pre-cDC2, which are dedicated precursors to cDC2. The molecular regulation of this subset-specific specification process is poorly understood. However, it seems that, for pre-cDC1 development, sustained and reinforced action of IRF8 and basic leucine zipper ATF-like transcription factor 3 (BATF3) is necessary, as revealed by sophisticated mutation analysis of the BATF3 gene 10. Developmental specification of pre-cDC2, however, remains enigmatic. Pre-cDC1 and pre-cDC2 subsequently leave the bone marrow and seed peripheral organs giving rise to cDC1 and cDC2 under the influence of organ-specific microenvironmental cues, respectively.

In conclusion, cDC1 and cDC2 specification occurs at the pre-DC stage and is driven by subset-restricted progenitors locked into cDC1 or cDC2 fate. This knowledge now supports the assumption that a core DC subset transcriptome is established within the bone marrow environment under yet-unknown cues, allowing the formation of a cDC1 and cDC2 identity. Subsequently, within peripheral tissues, pre-cDC1 and pre-cDC2 fully develop into functionally mature cDC1 and cDC2, allowing the tissue to imprint an additional level of tissue-specific regulation on them to enable organ- and niche-specific functional adaptation.

Recently, a dedicated DC progenitor lineage has been identified in human bone marrow, peripheral blood, spleen, and cord blood. Reports by Breton et al. 15 and Lee et al. 16 first identified human CDPs in bone marrow and cord blood alongside a circulating pre-DC in peripheral blood. Subsequently, a study by See et al. was able to refine the definition of these precursor populations and show that DC subset-specific pre-DC subsets also exist in human peripheral blood as well as bone marrow and blood 17.

Early imprinting of conventional dendritic cell identity

With the advent of single-cell transcriptomics and sophisticated genomic barcode-tracing strategies, it has become clear that the long-curated model of a stepwise hematopoietic development process is an oversimplification of myeloid hematopoiesis. Along these lines, studies using population-level barcode heterogeneity-tracing approaches revealed that a portion of HSCs contribute only to the DC repertoire and not to other repertoires, such as monocytes, or the lymphoid lineage, revealing that already at the HSC level a definitive fate decision can be made 18.

Furthermore, a single-cell transcriptomics approach, investigating the mouse CD117 + lineage marker-negative fraction, revealed that within the granulocyte macrophage progenitor (GMP) population, a population of transcriptomically pre-committed cells exist, showing the potential to give rise exclusively to DCs. This early DC progenitor upregulates hallmark transcriptional regulators of DCs, such as IRF8, inhibitor of DNA-binding 2 (ID2), and FLT3 alongside components of the MHC II antigen presentation pathway and gives rise preferentially to DCs, as shown in transplantation studies 19. However, the number of cells identified with a DC-specific transcriptomic program is small and most probably represents a physiological fallback mechanism or transient step toward the common CDP or a more committed DC progenitor. Additionally, substantial phenotypic overlap between the prior identified macrophage DC progenitor (MDP) 20 and this DC-committed GMP can be identified and should be investigated further. Taken together, evidence suggests that commitment to the DC lineage can be identified and maintained very early within the hematopoietic cascade and is most likely more prevalent than previously thought.

Tissue factors influencing dendritic cell subset identity

Within peripheral tissues, several cues have been identified to contribute to the tissue-specific regulation and development of cDCs. The transcriptional target of Notch2, recombining binding protein suppressor of hairless (Rbpj), has been shown to be critical for the development of cDC2 in the spleen and has been speculated to be crucial to maintain splenic cDC2s within their specific tissue niche 21. Similarly, the G-protein-coupled receptor Epstein-Barr virus-induced gene 2 (EBI2), which recognizes 7α,25-dihydroxycholesterols, has been shown to regulate the positioning of cDC2 within the splenic microenvironment and its loss resulted in reduced numbers of cDC2, further strengthening the assumption that proper positioning within the spleen is crucial for cell survival and organ-adapted functionality 22, 23. Alongside these two niche-associated factors, V-Rel Avian reticuloendotheliosis viral oncogene homolog B (RELB), a component of the nuclear factor kappa B (NFκB) signaling network, exhibits crucial functions for splenic cDC2 development; however, the molecular regulation of this effect remains elusive 24.

Within peripheral organs such as the lung, granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) has been explored as a tissue specification factor for cDCs. Indeed, Greter et al. were able to show that the maintenance and functional specialization of lung cDC1 are dependent on GM-CSF receptor signaling and, if perturbed, lead to loss of this subset and absence of T-cell responses toward particulate antigens, clearly identifying GM-CSF as a factor involved in tissue-specific imprinting of cDC development, maintenance, and function 25.

In the intestine, specifically in the small intestine, transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β) was identified as the major driver for the tissue-specific differentiation of CD103 + CD11b + DCs (a subset of cDC2 in the intestinal microenvironment), a subset involved in the maintenance of intestinal T helper (Th) type 17 immunity and in the induction of intestinal Foxp3 + T cells, clearly showing the importance of such tissue-restricted functional imprinting on DC subsets 26.

Furthermore, within the skin, lung, and small intestine, a unique subset of CD103 CD11b DCs exists which depends on the transcription factor KLF4 and is crucial for the induction of protective Th2 immunity (for example, against parasites such as Schistosoma mansoni) 27. However, the exact mechanism of induction of KLF4 expression within this subset remains elusive. Interestingly, in mice devoid of KLF4 within their pre-DC compartment, pre-cDC1 and pre-cDC2 develop normally and also can be found within the affected tissues but are not able to develop further into their mature tissue-adapted progeny, indicating that KLF4 is upregulated in response to a local tissue-restricted factor.

Overall, ample evidence suggests that the tissue of residence significantly shapes the last steps of cDC development toward a fully tissue-adapted cDC, enabling it to perform tissue-specific tasks while maintaining core DC features such as antigen presentation and migration. This realization of a two-step differentiation process of cDCs will enable better utilization of cDCs in tissue-specific vaccination strategies in humans in health and in disease. However, Heidkamp et al. noted that phenotypic and transcriptional profiling of cDC and pDC subtypes in different human tissues derived from a large number of human individuals reveals that DC subpopulations in organs of the lymphohematopoietic system (spleen, thymus, and blood) are strongly defined by ontogeny rather than by signals from the microenvironment 28. In contrast, DC subsets derived from human lung or skin differed substantially, strongly arguing that DCs react toward modulatory signals from tissue microenvironments 28. In Table 1, we summarize the current understanding of human and murine DCs.

Table 1. Characteristics of human and mouse dendritic cells.

Classification Main surface markers Pathogen sensors Major lineage TFs Major cytokines
Murine Human Murine Human Murine Human Murine Human
Plasmacytoid DC CD45R
CD45RA
CD317
Siglec-H
CD123/IL-3R
CD45RA
CD303/CLEC4C
CD304/BDCA-4
CD85κ/ILT3
CD85 g/ILT7
FCεR1
BTLA
DR6/TNFRSF21
CD300A
TLR7
TLR9
TLR12
RLR
STING
TLR7
TLR9
RLR
STING
TCF4/E2-2
IRF7
IFN-α
IFN-β
IFN-λ
IDO
IFN-α
TNF
IL-6
IDO
Myeloid cDC1 DEC205
CLEC9A
XCR1
CD141/BDCA-3
CD13
CD33
CLEC9A
CADM1/NECL2
BTLA
XCR1
TLR2,3,4,9
11,12,13
STING
TLR1,3
TLR6,8
TLR10
STING
BATF3
IRF8
ID2
BLC6
TGFβ
IL-12
IFN-λ
IFN-λ
TNF-α
IL-12
CXCL9
CXCL10
Myeloid cDC2 CD11b
SIRPα
CD1c
CD2
FCεR1
SIRPA
CD11b
CD11c
CD1a *
Langerin *
CLEC10A/CD301a
All TLR except
TLR3,11,12
RLR
NLR
STING
TLR2,4
TLR5,6
TLR8,9
RLR
NLR
STING
IRF4
KLF4
NOTCH2
RBPJ
IFN-α/β
IL-1
IL-12
IL-23
TGFβ
IL-8
IL-1
IL-12
IL-23
TNF-α
IL-10

DC, dendritic cell; TF, transcription factor; cDC, conventional dendritic cell; * inducible.

Heterogeneity of dendritic cells in the tumor microenvironment

DCs are best known for their prominent role in the induction of adaptive immune responses against infectious agents and other types of “offensive” antigens, including tumor antigens 29, 30. However, recent advances have highlighted DCs’ rather complex phenotypic heterogeneity and functional plasticity, based on their attributes, such as activation status, maturity, and polarization in the tumor microenvironment (TME) 3133. TME is the cellular environment in which tumors coexist with the surrounding blood vessels, immune cells, fibroblasts, bone marrow-derived inflammatory cells, lymphocytes, and the extracellular matrix 34, 35. Tumors and TME interact constantly. Tumors can influence the microenvironment by releasing extracellular signals, promoting tumor angiogenesis, and inducing peripheral immune tolerance, while the components of TME can also affect the growth and evolution of cancerous cells 36.

Generally speaking, in TME, mature DCs are considered immune stimulatory whereas immature DCs are thought to be suppressive and tolerogenic. Tumor-infiltrating DCs (TIDCs) have distinguishable markers, such as CD11c high/MHC II high CD11b + CD103 PD-L1 + IL4Rα + DCs, found in lung cancer 37. TIDCs have been found in TME in many cancer types, such as breast, colorectal, lung, renal, head and neck, bladder, gastric, and ovarian 38. Their activities are varied and highly complex. Moreover, cancer cells and their secreted immunosuppressive factors can undermine tumor immunity and disrupt functional differentiation and activation of DCs through various schemes, which are strong focus areas in cancer immunology.

cDC1, cDC2, and monocyte-derived dendritic cells

Analyses of murine and human cancers have shown that tumor-resident DCs consist mainly of three developmentally distinct subsets based on their expression of the CD64, MerTK, CD11b, XCR1, signal regulatory protein a (Sirpa), and CD103 surface markers: cDC1, cDC2, and monocyte-derived DCs (Mo-DCs) 39. Mo-DCs differentiate from Ly6C + or CD14 hi monocytes in mice and humans, respectively 40. Tumor-resident Mo-DCs are characterized by their high expression of CD11b, CD64, and MerTK and are predominantly considered suppressors of anti-tumor immunity. Mouse cDCs can be classified into two functionally distinct lineages: the XCR1 + IRF8 + cDC1 lineage and the CD11b + IRF4 + cDC2 lineage. Siglec-H and Ly6C were identified as lineage markers that distinguished pre-DC subpopulations committed to the cDC1 lineage (Siglec-H Ly6C pre-DCs) or cDC2 lineage (Siglec-H Ly6C + pre-DCs) 8, 10. cDC1s are also characterized by their high expression of XCR1 and have been reported to play predominantly an anti-tumor role. The cDC2s, in contrast, are characterized mainly by their high expression of CD11b and Sirpa and have been implicated in both anti- and pro-tumor mechanisms 41.

Mo-DCs are adept at tumor antigen uptake but lack strong T-cell stimulatory capacity because of nitric oxide-mediated immunosuppression and poor ability to migrate to tumor-draining lymph nodes 39. Flies et al. observed that CD11c + CD11b CD103 + cDC1s were absent in the peritoneal cavity of healthy mice but comprise up to 40% of DCs in ovarian tumor-bearing mice and retained T-cell stimulatory capacity in advanced disease 42. Monocytes exposed to the appropriate conditions such as treatment with the immunostimulatory agents monosodium urate crystals and Mycobacterium smegmatis can become Mo-DCs and powerful activators of tumor-specific CD8 + T cells and anti-tumor immunity 43, 44. Among CD11c + CD11b + cDC2s, Lair-1 expression further distinguishes stimulatory and immunoregulatory DC subsets, which are also enriched in TME. Interestingly, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) is expressed by Lair-1( hi) immunoregulatory DCs and may contribute to local tumor antigen-specific T-cell dysfunction 42. Like Mo-DCs, cDC2s were found to suppress cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) function in tumor-bearing mice via L-arginine metabolism, among other potential modes of action 45, which is consistent with a previous finding that increased breakdown of the amino acids arginine and tryptophan in tumor-associated DCs negatively impacts T-cell effector function 46.

Using an in vitro culture model that produces human Mo-DCs and monocyte-derived macrophages (Mo-macrophages) closely resembling those found in vivo in ascites, Goudot et al. showed that the transcription factors IRF4 and MAFB were critical regulators of monocyte differentiation into Mo-DCs and Mo-macrophages, respectively 47. Furthermore, activation of the aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR) promoted Mo-DC differentiation through the induction of positive regulatory domain zinc finger protein 1 (BLIMP-1) while impairing differentiation into Mo-macrophages 47, demonstrating a critical role of AHR as a molecular switch for monocyte fate specification in response to TME-derived signals. These findings were further supported by Sander et al. 48, who demonstrated that in vitro generated Mo-DCs resemble monocyte-derived antigen-presenting cells (APCs) found in ovarian cancer-associated ascites 49.

Plasmacytoid dendritic cells

pDCs are found in small numbers throughout the periphery and are recognized by their expression of B220, Ly6C, and PDCA.1 in mice and CD123, CD303/BDCA2, and CD304/BDCA4 in humans. Expression of SiglecH and Ly6D defined pDC lineage commitment along the lymphoid branch 50. pDCs selectively express Toll-like receptor 7 (TLR7) and TLR9, and their most important function is thought to be producing significant quantities of type 1 IFN in response to single-stranded viral RNA and DNA 51. pDCs also have the potential to act as APCs, as they express MHC II and co-stimulatory molecules; however, the ability of pDCs to phagocytose dead cells and present cell-associated antigen has not been clearly established nor has their ability to cross-present exogenous antigen on MHC class I 12. In human blood, single-cell RNA-sequencing analysis of blood DCs coupled with functional characterization has indicated that human pre-DCs contaminated the traditionally defined pDC gate and that this contamination is likely responsible for the previous misrepresentation of pDCs’ “T cell-activating” property 52. In tumors, the presence of pDCs seems to correlate with poor prognosis in both breast and ovarian cancers 53, 54, but pDCs can also act as therapeutic targets to elicit IFN-α release and antigen presentation by cDCs 55, 56. In mouse models of breast cancer, Wu et al. showed that activated pDCs can directly kill tumor cells through tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand (TRAIL) and granzyme B 57. Furthermore, pDCs initiated the sequential activation of natural killer cells and CD8 + T cells, which also contributed to inhibition of tumor growth 57.

Inflammatory dendritic cells

New evidence suggests that tumors can convert TIDCs into immunosuppressive regulatory cells. A population of inflammatory DCs (inf-DCs) with a suppressive phenotype was described in the TME of different transplantable and autochthonous models of ovarian cancer 58. Inf-DCs originate from circulating Ly6C high monocytes as a consequence of inflammation, cancer, or infection 5962 and are generally absent under steady-state conditions. In mice, inf-DCs are identified as MHC II + CD11b + CD11c + F4/80 + Ly6c + and express CD206, CD115/M-CSFR, Mac-3/CD107b, FcεRI, and CD64 as well as the transcription factor zinc finger and BTB domain-containing 46 (Zbtb46). FcεRI appears to be a useful marker to distinguish inf-DCs from cDCs and macrophages. Several studies have shown that inf-DCs can activate antigen-specific CD4 + T-cell responses ex vivo. Inf-DCs can also cross-present exogenous antigens in different models, including Lewis lung carcinoma, HSV-1 reactivation, experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis, and allograft rejection models 63, 64.

In conclusion, DCs of a heterologous nature are frequently recruited to tumor sites by specific tumor-derived and stroma-derived factors, which may impair DC maturation, differentiation, and function in TME, resulting in the deficient formation of anti-tumor immune response or development of DC-mediated tolerance and immune suppression 65, 66. These factors include, but are not limited to, growth factors such as vascular endothelium growth factor (VEGF), TGF-β, and growth/differentiation factor 15 (GDF-15) 6769; cytokines such as interleukin-6 (IL-6), IL-10, CSF1, and receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa-Β ligand (RANKL) 7076; and chemokines such as CCL2, monocyte inhibitory protein-3a (MIP-3a), stem cell factor-1 (SDF-1), mucin 1 (MUC1) 7780, and others such as prostaglandin E 2 (PGE 2) 81, 82 and PD-L1 31. The tumor-derived immunoevasive and suppressive mechanisms constitute a major obstacle to the generation of effective anti-tumor immunity. Therefore, understanding the intercellular and intracellular circuits that modulate the immunogenic and tolerogenic phenotype of DCs in cancer may provide crucial insights for developing adjuvant treatments to alleviate immunosuppression in the TME and improve the clinical efficacies of cancer vaccines and immunotherapies.

Abbreviations

AHR, aryl hydrocarbon receptor; APC, antigen-presenting cell; BATF3, basic leucine zipper ATF-like transcription factor 3; cDC, conventional dendritic cell; CDP, common dendritic cell progenitor; CSF, colony-stimulating factor; DC, dendritic cell; FLT3, Fms-like tyrosine kinase 3; GM-CSF, granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor; GMP, granulocyte macrophage progenitor; HSC, hematopoietic stem cell; IFN, interferon; inf-DC, inflammatory dendritic cell; IL, interleukin; IRF, interferon regulatory factor 8; KLF4, Krüppel-like factor 4; M-CSFR, macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor; MHC, major histocompatibility complex; Mo-DC, monocyte-derived dendritic cell; Mo-macrophage, monocyte-derived macrophage; pDC, plasmacytoid dendritic cell; PD-L1, programmed death-ligand 1; Sirpa, signal regulatory protein a; TGF-β, transforming growth factor-beta; Th, T helper; TIDC, tumor-infiltrating dendritic cell; TLR, Toll-like receptor; TME, tumor microenvironment

Editorial Note on the Review Process

F1000 Faculty Reviews are commissioned from members of the prestigious F1000 Faculty and are edited as a service to readers. In order to make these reviews as comprehensive and accessible as possible, the referees provide input before publication and only the final, revised version is published. The referees who approved the final version are listed with their names and affiliations but without their reports on earlier versions (any comments will already have been addressed in the published version).

The referees who approved this article are:

  • Elodie Segura, Institut Curie, PSL Research University, INSERM, Paris, France

  • Michael Shurin, Department of Pathology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Funding Statement

XM was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China grants 31670913 and 81872353.

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

[version 1; referees: 2 approved]

References

  • 1. Naik SH, Metcalf D, van Nieuwenhuijze A, et al. : Intrasplenic steady-state dendritic cell precursors that are distinct from monocytes. Nat Immunol. 2006;7(6):663–71. 10.1038/ni1340 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 2. Naik SH, Sathe P, Park HY, et al. : Development of plasmacytoid and conventional dendritic cell subtypes from single precursor cells derived in vitro and in vivo. Nat Immunol. 2007;8(11):1217–26. 10.1038/ni1522 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Naik SH, Proietto AI, Wilson NS, et al. : Cutting edge: generation of splenic CD8 + and CD8 - dendritic cell equivalents in Fms-like tyrosine kinase 3 ligand bone marrow cultures. J Immunol. 2005;174(11):6592–7. 10.4049/jimmunol.174.11.6592 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Sathe P, Metcalf D, Vremec D, et al. : Lymphoid tissue and plasmacytoid dendritic cells and macrophages do not share a common macrophage-dendritic cell-restricted progenitor. Immunity. 2014;41(1):104–15. 10.1016/j.immuni.2014.05.020 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Broz ML, Krummel MF: The emerging understanding of myeloid cells as partners and targets in tumor rejection. Cancer Immunol Res. 2015;3(4):313–9. 10.1158/2326-6066.CIR-15-0041 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Durai V, Murphy KM: Functions of Murine Dendritic Cells. Immunity. 2016;45(4):719–36. 10.1016/j.immuni.2016.10.010 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 7. Sichien D, Scott CL, Martens L, et al. : IRF8 Transcription Factor Controls Survival and Function of Terminally Differentiated Conventional and Plasmacytoid Dendritic Cells, Respectively. Immunity. 2016;45(3):626–40. 10.1016/j.immuni.2016.08.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 8. Schlitzer A, Sivakamasundari V, Chen J, et al. : Identification of cDC1- and cDC2-committed DC progenitors reveals early lineage priming at the common DC progenitor stage in the bone marrow. Nat Immunol. 2015;16(7):718–28. 10.1038/ni.3200 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Liu K, Victora GD, Schwickert TA, et al. : In vivo analysis of dendritic cell development and homeostasis. Science. 2009;324(5925):392–7. 10.1126/science.1170540 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Grajales-Reyes GE, Iwata A, Albring J, et al. : Batf3 maintains autoactivation of Irf8 for commitment of a CD8α + conventional DC clonogenic progenitor. Nat Immunol. 2015;16(7):708–17. 10.1038/ni.3197 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Lee PN: Correspondence re: E.T.H. Fontham et al., lung cancer in nonsmoking women: a multicenter case-control study. Cancer epidemiol., biomarkers & prev., 1: 35-43, 1991. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1992;1(4):332–3; author reply 333–4. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Villadangos JA, Young L: Antigen-presentation properties of plasmacytoid dendritic cells. Immunity. 2008;29(3):352–61. 10.1016/j.immuni.2008.09.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Guilliams M, Ginhoux F, Jakubzick C, et al. : Dendritic cells, monocytes and macrophages: a unified nomenclature based on ontogeny. Nat Rev Immunol. 2014;14(8):571–8. 10.1038/nri3712 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Hansen M, Andersen MH: The role of dendritic cells in cancer. Semin Immunopathol. 2017;39(3):307–16. 10.1007/s00281-016-0592-y [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 15. Breton G, Lee J, Zhou YJ, et al. : Circulating precursors of human CD1c + and CD141 + dendritic cells. J Exp Med. 2015;212(3):401–13. 10.1084/jem.20141441 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Lee J, Breton G, Oliveira TY, et al. : Restricted dendritic cell and monocyte progenitors in human cord blood and bone marrow. J Exp Med. 2015;212(3):385–99. 10.1084/jem.20141442 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. See P, Dutertre CA, Chen J, et al. : Mapping the human DC lineage through the integration of high-dimensional techniques. Science. 2017;356(6342): pii: eaag3009. 10.1126/science.aag3009 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 18. Naik SH, Perié L, Swart E, et al. : Diverse and heritable lineage imprinting of early haematopoietic progenitors. Nature. 2013;496(7444):229–32. 10.1038/nature12013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 19. Paul F, Arkin Y, Giladi A, et al. : Transcriptional Heterogeneity and Lineage Commitment in Myeloid Progenitors. Cell. 2015;163(7):1663–77. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.11.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 20. Auffray C, Fogg DK, Narni-Mancinelli E, et al. : CX 3CR1 + CD115 + CD135 + common macrophage/DC precursors and the role of CX 3CR1 in their response to inflammation. J Exp Med. 2009;206(3):595–606. 10.1084/jem.20081385 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Lewis KL, Caton ML, Bogunovic M, et al. : Notch2 receptor signaling controls functional differentiation of dendritic cells in the spleen and intestine. Immunity. 2011;35(5):780–91. 10.1016/j.immuni.2011.08.013 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Yi T, Cyster JG: EBI2-mediated bridging channel positioning supports splenic dendritic cell homeostasis and particulate antigen capture. eLife. 2013;2:e00757. 10.7554/eLife.00757 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 23. Gatto D, Wood K, Caminschi I, et al. : The chemotactic receptor EBI2 regulates the homeostasis, localization and immunological function of splenic dendritic cells. Nat Immunol. 2013;14(5):446–53. 10.1038/ni.2555 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Wu L, D'Amico A, Winkel KD, et al. : RelB is essential for the development of myeloid-related CD8alpha - dendritic cells but not of lymphoid-related CD8alpha + dendritic cells. Immunity. 1998;9(6):839–47. 10.1016/S1074-7613(00)80649-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Greter M, Helft J, Chow A, et al. : GM-CSF controls nonlymphoid tissue dendritic cell homeostasis but is dispensable for the differentiation of inflammatory dendritic cells. Immunity. 2012;36(6):1031–46. 10.1016/j.immuni.2012.03.027 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Bain CC, Montgomery J, Scott CL, et al. : TGFβR signalling controls CD103 +CD11b + dendritic cell development in the intestine. Nat Commun. 2017;8(1): 620. 10.1038/s41467-017-00658-6 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 27. Tussiwand R, Everts B, Grajales-Reyes GE, et al. : Klf4 expression in conventional dendritic cells is required for T helper 2 cell responses. Immunity. 2015;42(5):916–28. 10.1016/j.immuni.2015.04.017 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Heidkamp GF, Sander J, Lehmann CHK, et al. : Human lymphoid organ dendritic cell identity is predominantly dictated by ontogeny, not tissue microenvironment. Sci Immunol. 2016;1(6): pii: eaai7677. 10.1126/sciimmunol.aai7677 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Lutz MB, Schuler G: Immature, semi-mature and fully mature dendritic cells: which signals induce tolerance or immunity? Trends Immunol. 2002;23(9):445–9. 10.1016/S1471-4906(02)02281-0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Shortman K, Liu YJ: Mouse and human dendritic cell subtypes. Nat Rev Immunol. 2002;2(3):151–61. 10.1038/nri746 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Krempski J, Karyampudi L, Behrens MD, et al. : Tumor-infiltrating programmed death receptor-1 + dendritic cells mediate immune suppression in ovarian cancer. J Immunol. 2011;186(12):6905–13. 10.4049/jimmunol.1100274 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Lin A, Schildknecht A, Nguyen LT, et al. : Dendritic cells integrate signals from the tumor microenvironment to modulate immunity and tumor growth. Immunol Lett. 2010;127(2):77–84. 10.1016/j.imlet.2009.09.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Scarlett UK, Rutkowski MR, Rauwerdink AM, et al. : Ovarian cancer progression is controlled by phenotypic changes in dendritic cells. J Exp Med. 2012;209(3):495–506. 10.1084/jem.20111413 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 34. Joyce JA, Fearon DT: T cell exclusion, immune privilege, and the tumor microenvironment. Science. 2015;348(6230):74–80. 10.1126/science.aaa6204 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Spill F, Reynolds DS, Kamm RD, et al. : Impact of the physical microenvironment on tumor progression and metastasis. Curr Opin Biotechnol. 2016;40:41–8. 10.1016/j.copbio.2016.02.007 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 36. Korneev KV, Atretkhany KN, Drutskaya MS, et al. : TLR-signaling and proinflammatory cytokines as drivers of tumorigenesis. Cytokine. 2017;89:127–35. 10.1016/j.cyto.2016.01.021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 37. Pyfferoen L, Brabants E, Everaert C, et al. : The transcriptome of lung tumor-infiltrating dendritic cells reveals a tumor-supporting phenotype and a microRNA signature with negative impact on clinical outcome. Oncoimmunology. 2017;6(1): e1253655. 10.1080/2162402X.2016.1253655 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 38. Karthaus N, Torensma R, Tel J: Deciphering the message broadcast by tumor-infiltrating dendritic cells. Am J Pathol. 2012;181(3):733–42. 10.1016/j.ajpath.2012.05.012 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Laoui D, Keirsse J, Morias Y, et al. : The tumour microenvironment harbours ontogenically distinct dendritic cell populations with opposing effects on tumour immunity. Nat Commun. 2016;7: 13720. 10.1038/ncomms13720 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 40. León B, Ardavín C: Monocyte-derived dendritic cells in innate and adaptive immunity. Immunol Cell Biol. 2008;86(4):320–4. 10.1038/icb.2008.14 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Keirsse J, Van Damme H, Van Ginderachter JA, et al. : Exploiting tumor-associated dendritic cell heterogeneity for novel cancer therapies. J Leukoc Biol. 2017;102(2):317–24. 10.1189/jlb.4MR1116-466R [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 42. Flies DB, Higuchi T, Harris JC, et al. : Immune checkpoint blockade reveals the stimulatory capacity of tumor-associated CD103 + dendritic cells in late-stage ovarian cancer. Oncoimmunology. 2016;5(8):e1185583. 10.1080/2162402X.2016.1185583 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 43. Ma Y, Adjemian S, Mattarollo SR, et al. : Anticancer chemotherapy-induced intratumoral recruitment and differentiation of antigen-presenting cells. Immunity. 2013;38(4):729–41. 10.1016/j.immuni.2013.03.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Kuhn S, Yang J, Ronchese F: Monocyte-Derived Dendritic Cells Are Essential for CD8 + T Cell Activation and Antitumor Responses After Local Immunotherapy. Front Immunol. 2015;6:584. 10.3389/fimmu.2015.00584 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Norian LA, Rodriguez PC, O'Mara LA, et al. : Tumor-infiltrating regulatory dendritic cells inhibit CD8 + T cell function via L-arginine metabolism. Cancer Res. 2009;69(7):3086–94. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-2826 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Mellor AL, Munn DH: IDO expression by dendritic cells: tolerance and tryptophan catabolism. Nat Rev Immunol. 2004;4(10):762–74. 10.1038/nri1457 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Goudot C, Coillard A, Villani AC, et al. : Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Controls Monocyte Differentiation into Dendritic Cells versus Macrophages. Immunity. 2017;47(3):582–596.e6. 10.1016/j.immuni.2017.08.016 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 48. Sander J, Schmidt SV, Cirovic B, et al. : Cellular Differentiation of Human Monocytes Is Regulated by Time-Dependent Interleukin-4 Signaling and the Transcriptional Regulator NCOR2. Immunity. 2017;47(6):1051–1066.e12. 10.1016/j.immuni.2017.11.024 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 49. Segura E, Touzot M, Bohineust A, et al. : Human inflammatory dendritic cells induce Th17 cell differentiation. Immunity. 2013;38(2):336–48. 10.1016/j.immuni.2012.10.018 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 50. Rodrigues PF, Alberti-Servera L, Eremin A, et al. : Distinct progenitor lineages contribute to the heterogeneity of plasmacytoid dendritic cells. Nat Immunol. 2018;19:711–722. 10.1038/s41590-018-0136-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 51. Swiecki M, Colonna M: The multifaceted biology of plasmacytoid dendritic cells. Nat Rev Immunol. 2015;15(8):471–85. 10.1038/nri3865 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Villani AC, Satija R, Reynolds G, et al. : Single-cell RNA-seq reveals new types of human blood dendritic cells, monocytes, and progenitors. Science. 2017;356(6335): pii: eaah4573. 10.1126/science.aah4573 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 53. Conrad C, Gregorio J, Wang YH, et al. : Plasmacytoid dendritic cells promote immunosuppression in ovarian cancer via ICOS costimulation of Foxp3 + T-regulatory cells. Cancer Res. 2012;72(20):5240–9. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-2271 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Treilleux I, Blay JY, Bendriss-Vermare N, et al. : Dendritic cell infiltration and prognosis of early stage breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10(22):7466–74. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-0684 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Kranz LM, Diken M, Haas H, et al. : Systemic RNA delivery to dendritic cells exploits antiviral defence for cancer immunotherapy. Nature. 2016;534(7607):396–401. 10.1038/nature18300 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 56. Le Mercier I, Poujol D, Sanlaville A, et al. : Tumor promotion by intratumoral plasmacytoid dendritic cells is reversed by TLR7 ligand treatment. Cancer Res. 2013;73(15):4629–40. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-3058 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Wu J, Li S, Yang Y, et al. : TLR-activated plasmacytoid dendritic cells inhibit breast cancer cell growth in vitro and in vivo. Oncotarget. 2017;8(7):11708–18. 10.18632/oncotarget.14315 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 58. Tesone AJ, Rutkowski MR, Brencicova E, et al. : Satb1 Overexpression Drives Tumor-Promoting Activities in Cancer-Associated Dendritic Cells. Cell Rep. 2016;14(7):1774–86. 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.01.056 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 59. Corrales L, McWhirter SM, Dubensky TW, Jr, et al. : The host STING pathway at the interface of cancer and immunity. J Clin Invest. 2016;126(7):2404–11. 10.1172/JCI86892 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 60. Merad M, Sathe P, Helft J, et al. : The dendritic cell lineage: ontogeny and function of dendritic cells and their subsets in the steady state and the inflamed setting. Annu Rev Immunol. 2013;31:563–604. 10.1146/annurev-immunol-020711-074950 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Dos Santos VG, Orfali RL, de Oliveira T, et al. : Evidence of regulatory myeloid dendritic cells and circulating inflammatory epidermal dendritic cells-like modulated by Toll-like receptors 2 and 7/8 in adults with atopic dermatitis. Int J Dermatol. 2017;56(6):630–5. 10.1111/ijd.13537 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 62. Goldeck D, Maetzler W, Berg D, et al. : Altered dendritic cell subset distribution in patients with Parkinson's disease: Impact of CMV serostatus. J Neuroimmunol. 2016;290:60–5. 10.1016/j.jneuroim.2015.11.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 63. Veglia F, Gabrilovich DI: Dendritic cells in cancer: the role revisited. Curr Opin Immunol. 2017;45:43–51. 10.1016/j.coi.2017.01.002 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 64. Zhang Y, Hu X, Hu Y, et al. : Anti-CD40-induced inflammatory E-cadherin+ dendritic cells enhance T cell responses and antitumour immunity in murine Lewis lung carcinoma. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2015;34:11. 10.1186/s13046-015-0126-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Trojandt S, Bellinghausen I, Reske-Kunz AB, et al. : Tumor-derived immuno-modulators induce overlapping pro-tolerogenic gene expression signatures in human dendritic cells. Hum Immunol. 2016;77(12):1223–31. 10.1016/j.humimm.2016.08.014 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 66. Zong J, Keskinov AA, Shurin GV, et al. : Tumor-derived factors modulating dendritic cell function. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2016;65(7):821–33. 10.1007/s00262-016-1820-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 67. Gabrilovich DI, Chen HL, Girgis KR, et al. : Production of vascular endothelial growth factor by human tumors inhibits the functional maturation of dendritic cells. Nat Med. 1996;2(10):1096–103. 10.1038/nm1096-1096 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Song S, Yuan P, Wu H, et al. : Dendritic cells with an increased PD-L1 by TGF-β induce T cell anergy for the cytotoxicity of hepatocellular carcinoma cells. Int Immunopharmacol. 2014;20(1):117–23. 10.1016/j.intimp.2014.02.027 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. Zhou Z, Li W, Song Y, et al. : Growth differentiation factor-15 suppresses maturation and function of dendritic cells and inhibits tumor-specific immune response. PLoS One. 2013;8(11):e78618. 10.1371/journal.pone.0078618 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Demoulin SA, Somja J, Duray A, et al. : Cervical (pre)neoplastic microenvironment promotes the emergence of tolerogenic dendritic cells via RANKL secretion. Oncoimmunology. 2015;4(6):e1008334. 10.1080/2162402X.2015.1008334 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Shurin MR, Yurkovetsky ZR, Tourkova IL, et al. : Inhibition of CD40 expression and CD40-mediated dendritic cell function by tumor-derived IL-10. Int J Cancer. 2002;101(1):61–8. 10.1002/ijc.10576 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Oosterhoff D, Lougheed S, van de Ven R, et al. : Tumor-mediated inhibition of human dendritic cell differentiation and function is consistently counteracted by combined p38 MAPK and STAT3 inhibition. Oncoimmunology. 2012;1(5):649–58. 10.4161/onci.20365 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 73. Schwarz AM, Banning-Eichenseer U, Seidel K, et al. : Impact of interleukin-10 on phenotype and gene expression during early monocyte differentiation into dendritic cells. Anticancer Res. 2013;33(11):4791–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Hirano T: Interleukin 6 and its receptor: ten years later. Int Rev Immunol. 1998;16(3–4):249–84. 10.3109/08830189809042997 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Alshamsan A: Induction of tolerogenic dendritic cells by IL-6-secreting CT26 colon carcinoma. Immunopharmacol Immunotoxicol. 2012;34(3):465–9. 10.3109/08923973.2011.625034 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76. Lo AS, Gorak-Stolinska P, Bachy V, et al. : Modulation of dendritic cell differentiation by colony-stimulating factor-1: role of phosphatidylinositol 3'-kinase and delayed caspase activation. J Leukoc Biol. 2007;82(6):1446–54. 10.1189/jlb.0307142 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Stoitzner P, Green LK, Jung JY, et al. : Inefficient presentation of tumor-derived antigen by tumor-infiltrating dendritic cells. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2008;57(11):1665–73. 10.1007/s00262-008-0487-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Zou W, Machelon V, Coulomb-L'Hermin A, et al. : Stromal-derived factor-1 in human tumors recruits and alters the function of plasmacytoid precursor dendritic cells. Nat Med. 2001;7(12):1339–46. 10.1038/nm1201-1339 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Teicher BA, Fricker SP: CXCL12 (SDF-1)/CXCR4 pathway in cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2010;16(11):2927–31. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-2329 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Carlos CA, Dong HF, Howard OM, et al. : Human tumor antigen MUC1 is chemotactic for immature dendritic cells and elicits maturation but does not promote Th1 type immunity. J Immunol. 2005;175(3):1628–35. 10.4049/jimmunol.175.3.1628 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. Zelenay S, van der Veen AG, Böttcher JP, et al. : Cyclooxygenase-Dependent Tumor Growth through Evasion of Immunity. Cell. 2015;162(2):1257–70. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.08.015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation
  • 82. Castellone MD, Teramoto H, Williams BO, et al. : Prostaglandin E 2 promotes colon cancer cell growth through a G s-axin-beta-catenin signaling axis. Science. 2005;310(5753):1504–10. 10.1126/science.1116221 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; F1000 Recommendation

Articles from F1000Research are provided here courtesy of F1000 Research Ltd

RESOURCES