ReviewFrontiers in immunology2026
Modeling macrophage-T cell interactions in the breast cancer immune microenvironment: from spatial omics to functional validation.
Review in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breast cancer immunity depends on more than the number of immune cells in a tumor. It is also shaped by where those cells sit, which neighbors they contact, and what functional states they adopt locally. Tumor-associated macrophages (TAMs) and T cells are a key pairing in this setting. Depending on tissue context, their crosstalk may support cytotoxic immunity, reinforce immune exclusion, promote T-cell exhaustion, or weaken therapeutic response. Spatial technologies now allow these states to be examined in intact tumor sections rather than inferred from dissociated or bulk samples. Antibody-based imaging approaches, including imaging mass cytometry, MIBI, and CODEX, together with high-plex transcriptomic platforms such as MERFISH, Xenium, CosMx, Visium, GeoMx, and related methods, have revealed inflamed, excluded, myeloid-rich, stromal-barrier, and tertiary lymphoid structure-associated niches in breast cancer. However, spatial maps alone cannot establish mechanism. Cells that lie close together may not necessarily interact, and computational tools, including ligand-receptor scoring, graph-based neighborhood modeling, and spatial biomarker prediction, can only prioritize candidate macrophage-T cell programs. Functional validation remains essential. In this mini review, we discuss how spatial omics, computational modeling, organoid and explant cultures, microfluidic models, perturbation assays, and therapeutic testing can be linked to study macrophage-T cell crosstalk. We highlight a practical workflow in which spatial maps generate hypotheses, experimental systems test causality, and post-treatment profiling determines whether candidate interactions are remodeled by therapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.