Introduction

Pyroptosis, a form of programmed cell death, is closely connected to the inflammatory response, facilitating communication between innate and adaptive immunity [1, 2]. This emerging type of regulated cell death significantly influences cancer modulation, antitumor immunity, and the prognosis of cancer patients [2]. The impacts of pyroptosis are not only inhibiting tumor cell proliferation but also sha** an immunosuppressive microenvironment whichs promote tumor growth [3]. This immunosuppressive microenvironment has implications for the efficacy of anticancer therapy.

The tumor microenvironment (TME) comprises a diverse array of non-tumor cells, such as immune cells, stromal cells, and blood vessels, as well as structural components within the tumors, including extracellular matrix proteins and cytokines. These components interact with the tumor cells, collectively influencing tumor development, metastasis, and ultimately determining the tumor's responsiveness to various treatment strategies. Cancer cells often develop drug resistance due to genomic instability, while non-tumor cells in the TME are genetically more stable and respond better to therapies [5]. Resha** the TIME and restoring the tumor-killing ability of anti-tumor immune cells is a key area of research. Tumor immunotherapy, particularly chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), has shown promising results in combating tumor immune escape [6].

Pyroptosis is a critical factor in the origin, management, and outcome of tumors. Understanding the features and molecular mechanisms of cell pyroptosis, as well as the regulatory impact of TIME on tumor cell pyroptosis, is essential for advancing therapeutic approaches and improving treatment efficacy. This article aims to explore the characteristics and molecular mechanisms of pyroptosis, the influence of immune cells within the TIME on tumor cell pyroptosis, and two key tumor immunotherapy approaches. By gaining a comprehensive understanding of pyroptosis, this research aims to provide valuable insights for the development of new tumor immunotherapy strategies.

The characteristics and molecular mechanisms of cell pyroptosis

The emerging of pyroptosis

In the 1990s, pyroptosis was initially discovered in mouse macrophages infected by Shigella Flexner and was classified as apoptosis mistakenly [7, 8]. Subsequent research by Thirumalai et al. in 1997 revealed that Shigella dysenteriae activated caspase-1 in human monocyte-derived macrophages, leading to the maturation and subsequent release of Interleukin-1β (IL-1β) [9]. The Zychlinsky laboratory in 1999 demonstrated that knocking out caspase-1 could prevent cell death caused by Salmonella [10]. The term “pyroptosis”' was coined in 2001 by Cookson and Brennan, defining it as a caspase-1-dependent form of cell death distinct from apoptosis [11]. The concept of inflammasome activating inflammatory caspases and processing pro-IL-1β was introduced in 2002 [12]. In 2012, non-canonical caspase-11 was discovered to trigger cell death independently of caspase-1 during Salmonella infection [13]. (Fig. 1) gasdermin D (GSDMD) was redefined as the executioner of pyroptosis in 2015 [5, 14, 15]. Since then, other proteins in the gasdermin family have been found to mediate pyroptosis through caspase cleavage. Wang et al. and Rogers et al. demonstrated in 2017 that chemotherapeutic agents could induce pyroptosis by activating caspase-3 to cleave GSDME [16, 17]. The discovery has been widely utilized in tumor treatment. The Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death revised the definition of pyroptosis in 2018, describing it as a form of regulated cell death that critically depends on the formation of plasma membrane pores by members of the gasdermin protein family, often (but not always) as a consequence of inflammatory caspase activation. Notably, caspase-8 was found to participate in pyroptosis by activating GSDME in 2019 [18]. Furthermore, enzymes produced by immune cells have been identified as mediators of pyroptosis, working by recognizing and cleaving gasdermin proteins, thus shedding light on the intricate communication between the immune microenvironment and parenchymal cells. Reports from 2020 suggest that granzyme B (GzmB) can directly cleave GSDME, leading to the activation of pyroptosis and triggering the antitumor immune response [63]. Despite advancements in therapies such as CAR-T cell therapy and ICIs, there are still limitations in the treatment and prognosis of cancer patients due to tumor immune escape mechanisms.

CAR-T cell therapy

CAR-T cell therapy, a form of immunotherapy, involves genetically engineering T cells to target and kill tumors using antibody-derived CARs [104]. These modified T cells target inhibitory signaling molecules present in tumor cells [105]. Upon recognition of tumor-associated antigens by CARs, CAR-T cell activity is significantly increased. The process by which CAR-T cells induce tumor cell death through pyroptosis has been well documented in the granzyme pathway. Despite being a groundbreaking advancement in cancer treatment, CAR-T cell therapy encounters challenges related to efficacy, toxicity, side effects, etc. [106].

CAR-T therapy, a highly personalized form of immunotherapy, holds great promise for tumor treatment. It is characterized by superior cytotoxicity, persistence, and antigen recognition capabilities despite tumor-induced immunosuppressive influences [107, 108]. This therapy has demonstrated long-lasting antitumor immune responses in B-cell malignancies such as acute lymphoblastic leukemia, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma [109]. The positive outcomes of CAR-T therapy led to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of anti-CD19 CAR-T cell therapy for B cell malignancies, marking a historic and unprecedented milestone [110].

Although CAR-T cell therapy play a non-negligible role in tumor treatment, various challenges hinder its therapeutic efficacy in both solid tumors and hematological malignancies. Further investigations are needed to address the toxicity and side effects associated with this therapy [106]. Major limitations include life-threatening toxicities, limited efficacy against solid tumors, resistance to B cell malignancies, antigen escape, limited persistence, poor trafficking, tumor infiltration, and as well as the presence of an immunosuppressive microenvironment [106]. Factors contributing to these limitations in solid tumor treatment include physical barriers hindering CAR-T cell entry, migration hindrance, recruitment of immunosuppressive cells, and sha** of an immunosuppressive environment [104]. CRS is a common immune-mediated toxicity characterized by fever, hypotension, and respiratory insufficiency due to elevated serum cytokine levels. Strategies such as knocking out GSDME, depleting macrophages, or inhibiting caspase-1 in mouse models have shown promise in mitigating CRS [63]. Research indicates CRS severity is correlated with GSDME and lactate dehydrogenase levels [63]. Therefore, it is crucial to not only consider the effect of CAR-T treatment but also monitor and manage the occurrence of CRS.

In order to advance therapeutic interventions, particularly in reducing drug resistance and minimizing toxic side effects, current research suggests that enhancing the efficacy of CAR-T anti-cancer therapy can be achieved through the choice of T-cell subpopulations and the modification of their nature [111]. This includes adjusting the ratio of helper T cells (CD4+T cells) to CD8+T cells in a patient-specific manner and modifying the differentiation status of T-cell modification [112]. To address potential toxic side effects, it is important to increase the selectivity of the isoform of the target antigen isoform to prevent CAR-T cells from attacking healthy tissue [111]. Although various strategies have been proposed to overcome the limitations of CAR-T therapy, many have not progressed to clinical trials. Therefore, further investigation into existing methodological approaches and the development of innovative strategies are essential to enhance anti-tumor activity and reduce toxicity.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors

ICIs, a prominent form of immunotherapy, have received significant attention as compelling treatment options [113]. They have emerged as potent therapeutic options for a wide array of solid tumors. Among immune checkpoint regulators, CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1 are prominent, drawing substantial interest in the field of oncology as promising and powerful targets for cancer therapeutics [114]. As commonly understood, cancer cells utilize various mechanisms to evade the human immune system, including evading recognition by immune cells, enhancing resistance to apoptotic pathways, and creating immunosuppressive conditions [114]. Additionally, immune checkpoints are recognized as negative regulators of immune response and play a crucial role in preventing excessive peripheral tissue damage [115]. For example, the PD-1/PD-L1 system actively suppresses T lymphocyte proliferation, cytokine production, and cytotoxicity in cancer cells, leading to fatigue and apoptosis of tumor-specific T cells, allowing cancer cells to evade immune responses [116]. While the specific mechanisms of CTLA-4 activity remain unknown, it is postulated that its presence on the surface of T cells dampens T cell activation. This occurs through the active conveyance of inhibitory signals to T cells, achieved by outcompeting CD28 in binding CD80 and CD86 [117]. Targeting PD-1, PD-L1, or CTLA-4 effectively reverses the suppression of cytotoxic T lymphocytes, leading to the elimination of tumor cells by restoring T cell functionality. In immune-competent hosts, tumors evade immune surveillance during tumorigenesis. Blocking PD-1/PD-L1 enables T cells to enhance their growth, cytotoxicity, and infiltration into tumors, ultimately reducing tumorigenesis [118]. Currently, many drugs have been developed based on studies of ICIs, such as Ipilimumab Pembrolizumab, and Atezolizumab.

In 2011, Ipilimumab became the first FDA-approved ICI after successful trials in metastatic melanoma [119]. It's a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that targets CTLA-4. Mechanistically, it blocks the interaction between CTLA-4 and CD86/CD80 on T cells or antigen-presenting cells [120]. This interference prevents the inhibitory signals of CTLA-4 and allows CD28 to bind with CD80/CD86, ultimately promoting T-cell activation [121].

Pembrolizumab, a clinically approved PD-1 inhibitor, represents a significant advance in the treatment of unresectable, advanced, and metastatic cancer. Its FDA approval marks an important milestone in improving in the treatment outcomes for these complex cancer [122, 123]. Pembrolizumab is known for its strong binding to PD-1 with low affinity for Fc receptors and complement [124]. Pembrolizumab has become the first immune checkpoint inhibitor approved for first-line treatment in several melanomas. By preventing the suppression and deactivation of immune cells, pembrolizumab has revolutionised melanoma treatment and offers a new approach to this challenging cancer [125]. Pembrolizumab has shown significant potential in clinical trials, particularly in patients with higher levels of PD-L1, and has been approved for the treatment of multiple cancers.

Atezolizumab, a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody, has the distinction of being the first FDA-approved PD-L1 inhibitor approved by the FDA. It is used in the treatment of various cancers,including urothelial carcinoma, triple negative breast cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, and small cell lung cancer [126]. Atezolizumab is a genetically engineered PD-L1 inhibitor with a modified Fc domain designed to reduce interactions with Fcγ receptors to decrease reducing traditional antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity. This modification is intended to enhance the drug's therapeutic efficacy of the drug while minimising potential side effects related to immune system activation [127]. This Fc domain modification has been linked to the prevention of PD-L1 expression on immune cells, resulting in a more effective anti-tumor immune response [128].

While individual ICIs have shown efficacy in the fight against, there is a growing focus in clinical practice on using combination therapies to increase their pharmacological impact and reduce potential side effects. An example of this is the apexample of this umab not only as a stand-alone treatment but also in combination with Nivolumab, a PD-1 inhibitor [120]. This co-administration therapy has been approved for the treatment of unresectable (advanced) melanoma, renal cell carcinoma, and colorectal cancer with either high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) status [120]. The simultaneous use of these ICIs is intended to synergistically improve the therapeutic response, and represents a significant advance in cancer treatment [120].

Enhancing pyroptosis in tumor immunotherapy

Although current tumor immunotherapy has shown significant success, it still faces challenges in achieving efficacy in most patients [129]. Take ICIs for example, many tumours respond poorly or not at all to ICIs, in part due to a lack of tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) [130]. As a result, there is a pressing need for additional strategies to enhance antitumor immunity, such as converting these immunologically “cold” tumors into “hot” tumors [130]. In contrast to apoptosis, which tumor cells often resist, numerous studies suggest that harnessing pyroptosis in the tumor microenvironment can trigger a robust immune response, potentially offering more effective cancer therapy options and improving patient survival [129, 131, 132].

Pyroptosis is closely related to the immune system. On the one hand, pyroptosis can stimulate the immune system through by activating immune cells and immune factors [133]. Pyroptosis-produced cytokines can attract immune cells and ignite the immune system, potentially improving the efficacy of tumor immunotherapies [134]. On the other hand, immune cells like T cells and NK cells in the TIME can induce pyroptosis in tumor cells by releasing perforin and granzyme. Various therapeutic approaches can boost the immune system by inducing pyroptosis directly or indirectly [135]. Combining pyroptosis induction with ICIs has shown synergistic antitumor effects, even in ICI-resistant tumors [75]. However, inducing pyroptosis alone may not effectively inhibit tumors, highlighting the importance of combining pyroptosis inducers for cold tumors [75]. In CAR-T Cell Therapy, CAR-T cells induce pyroptosis in tumor cells by activating the caspase-3/GSDME pathway through GzmB release [19]. Nevertheless, pyroptosis is also linked to the toxicity and side effects of this therapy. Therefore, it is important to further investigate the role of pyroptosis in immunotherapy to optimize treatment efficacy and minimize associated toxicities and side effects.

Conclusions

Although considerable progress has been made in understanding the molecular mechanism of pyroptosis through intensive research, further investigations are needed to explore the signalling pathway, additional regulatory factors, functions of other GSDM family members, and the pathological implications of pyroptosis. The interaction between pyroptosis and tumors is intricate and multifaceted. On the one hand, pyroptosis inhibits tumor cell proliferation, invasion, and metastasis [136]. On the other hand, pyroptosis shapes an immunosuppressive microenvironment suitable for tumor cell growth to promote tumor growth. Moreover, the specific regulatory mechanisms of pyroptosis in different types of tumors and stages of tumor development remain unclear due to the complex nature of these relationships [137]. Furthermore, the regulation of tumor cell pyroptosis by various immune cells is complex and varies depending on the distribution of immune cells and subtypes within a specific tumor. This complexity highlights the need for in-depth studies to unravel the regulatory mechanisms of pyroptosis in specific tumors. Overall, tumor immunotherapy encounters numerous challenges.

In recent years, tumor immunotherapy has seen significant advance, particularly in CAR-T therapy and tumor ICIs. However, challenges such as the instability of CAR-T efficacy, toxic side effects, and tolerance issues hindered their its clinical progress. It is imperative to investigate existing strategies and develop innovative approaches to improve antitumor efficacy and minimize toxicity. Research on immune checkpoint inhibitors has also faced obstacles, despite recent achievements. The pace of research in this area has slowed, and the decrease in experimental patients poses a significant challenge to clinical trials involving ICIs.

Targeting pyroptosis as a novel therapeutic strategy for the development of anticancer drugs destined for clinical use is an intricate and labor-intensive journey. Crafting potent medications that precisely activate cell pyroptosis in human systems, while simultaneously adhering to rigorous safety testing protocols, continues to pose a formidable challenge within the realm of pharmaceutical research [75]. The integration of targeted therapies, whether as inducers or inhibitors of pyroptosis, with immunotherapy modalities holds immense promise in this endeavor. This multifaceted approach has the potential to unlock new frontiers in cancer treatment, providing patients with more effective and personalized therapeutic options [129]. Additionally, the synergistic benefit of combining chemotherapy and ICIs in cancer therapy has been widely reported, but the role of pyroptosis in chemotherapy toxicity requires further investigation [129]. Moreover, the DNA damage inflicted by radiotherapy can provoke cell pyroptosis via diverse signaling pathways, leading to significant antitumor efficacy when synergistically paired with immunotherapy [137,138,139]. This synergistic approach harnesses the power of both treatment modalities to achieve robust therapeutic outcomes. In essence, the synergistic alliance of targeted therapy, radiotherapy, and chemotherapy with immunotherapy holds immense potential in the realm of antitumor therapy. Nevertheless, the precise sequence and timing of these combined treatment modalities are pivotal considerations that significantly influence therapeutic efficacy and ultimately, patient prognosis [130].