Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Sex-based immune differences influence tumor progression in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.

Created on 09 Sep 2026

Authors

Sushmitha Jagadeesha, Felipe Lamenza, Puja Upadhaya, Catherine Chung, Amy Webb, Kishan Nyati, Ravi Ramalingam, Suvekshya Shrestha, Shaheer Masood, Sonali Dasari, Natalie Kazmierowicz, Steve Oghumu

Published in

Oral oncology. Volume 176. Pages 107929. Epub Mar 11, 2026.

Abstract

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) presents with higher incidence and poorer prognosis in males compared to females, yet the mechanisms underlying this sex disparity remains unclear. We investigated whether sex-specific immune responses contribute to differential tumor control using syngeneic and oral carcinogen-induced HNSCC mouse models., Female mice exhibited significantly reduced tumor burden, delayed progression and decreased metastatic potential compared to males. Immune profiling revealed a more robust antitumor immune landscape in females, characterized by heightened effector T cell activation, increased production of pro-inflammatory cytokines (IFN-γ, TNF-α), reduced expression of T cell exhaustion markers (PD-1, TIGIT), and a lower frequency of immunosuppressive myeloid-derived suppressor cells. Importantly, CD8+ T cell depletion in females abrogated the resistance to HNSCC in females, establishing CD8+ T cells as key mediators of sex-dependent antitumor immunity. Collectively, these findings demonstrate that enhanced effector T cell function coupled with reduced immunosuppression underlies improved tumor control in females and underscores the importance of integrating sex as a biological variable in immuno-oncology.

PMID:
41818928
Bibliographic data and abstract were imported from PubMed on 09 Sep 2026.

Read full publication at:
Please sign in to see all details.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Reviewers' rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this publication? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 1
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement