Cellular Senescence Is Immunogenic and Promotes Antitumor Immunity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellular senescence is a stress response that activates innate immune cells, but little is known about its interplay with the adaptive immune system. Here, we show that senescent cells combine several features that render them highly efficient in activating dendritic cells (DC) and antigen-specific CD8 T cells. This includes the release of alarmins, activation of IFN signaling, enhanced MHC class I machinery, and presentation of senescence-associated self-peptides that can activate CD8 T cells. In the context of cancer, immunization with senescent cancer cells elicits strong antitumor protection mediated by DCs and CD8 T cells. Interestingly, this protection is superior to immunization with cancer cells undergoing immunogenic cell death. Finally, the induction of senescence in human primary cancer cells also augments their ability to activate autologous antigen-specific tumor-infiltrating CD8 lymphocytes. Our study indicates that senescent cancer cells can be exploited to develop efficient and protective CD8-dependent antitumor immune responses. SIGNIFICANCE: Our study shows that senescent cells are endowed with a high immunogenic potential-superior to the gold standard of immunogenic cell death. We harness these properties of senescent cells to trigger efficient and protective CD8-dependent antitumor immune responses. See related article by Chen et al., p. 432. This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 247.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".