BPG is committed to discovery and dissemination of knowledge
Review
Copyright: ©Author(s) 2026.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. May 15, 2026; 18(5): 118319
Published online May 15, 2026. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v18.i5.118319
Table 1 Major immunobiological barriers to immune checkpoint inhibition in microsatellite-stable/proficient mismatch repair colorectal cancer and actionable therapeutic opportunities
Immune barrier/feature
Mechanistic basis
Representative readouts/contexts
Actionable strategies
Low immunogenicity and weak antigen presentationLow mutation load (MSS/Low TMB); impaired APC priming; HLA/B2M loss; IFN-JAK/STAT defectsLow TMB; low IFN-γ/CXCL9-CXCL10; MHC-I downregulationChemo/RT priming; STING/TLR agonists; epigenetic priming; vaccines/neoantigen approaches[13-15,25]
T cell exclusion by stromal/TGF-β programsCAF-derived TGF-β; dense ECM; reduced trafficking/retention immuneexcluded phenotypeCMS4/stromal signature; high TGF-β; desmoplasiaTGF-β blockade/traps; CAF/ECM modulation; CXCR4 blockade; vessel normalization[27,28]
Oncogenic signaling-driven immune escapeKRAS/BRAF/MAPK or WNT/β-catenin suppress antigen presentation/chemokines and promote myeloid recruitmentRAS/BRAF mutations; MAPK/WNT activation signaturesTargeted therapy to reprogram TME (e.g., BRAF/MEK/EGFR); rational combinations with ICI[15,26]
Myeloid-dominant suppression (TAM/MDSC)VEGF/CSF1/IL-8 axis; MDSC expansion; TAM M2 polarization; arginase/ROS-mediated T-cell suppressionHigh MDSC/TAM signatures; high NLR; VEGF-high tumorsAnti-VEGF/VEGFR TKIs; CSF1R/CXCR1/CXCR2 inhibition; CD47/SIRPα blockade (investigational)[10,16,19]
Checkpoint redundancy and T cell exhaustionCo-expression of PD-1/PD-L1 with CTLA-4/LAG-3/TIGIT/TIM-3 dysfunctional CD8 poolExhaustion signatures; multiple checkpoints on TILsDual/next-gen checkpoint blockade; costimulatory agonists; intratumoral delivery[10,14]
Immunometabolic suppressionHypoxia, lactate; adenosine (CD39/CD73); tryptophan catabolism (IDO/TDO); nutrient competitionHigh CD73; hypoxia markers; kynurenine/adenosine signaturesA2A/CD73 axis inhibitors; metabolic modulation; normalization of hypoxia/vasculature[35,36]
Microbiome-driven immune modulationDysbiosis (e.g., Fusobacterium) shapes myeloid programs and alters T cell function via microbial metabolitesStool metagenomics; Fusobacterium abundance; bile acid/SCFA profilesDiet/probiotic/FMT strategies; antibiotic stewardship; microbiome-informed stratification[33,34]
Metastatic niche effects (especially liver)Hepatic tolerogenic myeloid cells; sequestration/deletion of activated T cells systemic suppressionPresence of liver metastases; low intrahepatic CD8 densityLiver-directed RT/SIRT/TACE + ICI; consider liver metastasis status in trial design[45,66,70]
Table 2 Selected clinical evidence for immunotherapy combination strategies in microsatellite-stable/proficient mismatch repair metastatic colorectal cancer
Combination strategy/regimen
Clinical setting (population)
Key outcomes
Predictors/caveats
Ref.
Pembrolizumab + mFOLFOX7 or FOLFIRI (KEYNOTE-651)1 L/2 L advanced CRC (predominantly pMMR/MSS)Safety acceptable; no clear signal beyond historical chemo in unselected MSS cohortsSingle-arm; chemotherapy confounds ORR; highlights need for biomarker enrichmentGallois et al[57]; Kim et al[58]
Maintenance FP + bevacizumab ± atezolizumab (MODUL)Post-induction maintenance in mCRC (unselected; largely MSS)No significant PFS (HR = 0.92) or OS (HR = 0.94) improvement vs controlNegative phase II; subgroup signals require validationWang et al[59]
CAPOX + bevacizumab + pembrolizumab (FFCD1703-POCHI)1 L pMMR/MSS mCRC with high TIL/ImmunoscoreORR = 73% (17% CR); DCR 100%; 12-month PFS 52%; 24-month OS 80%Biomarker-enriched (high Immunoscore); confirm in larger/controlled studiesYamaguchi et al[60]
Regorafenib + nivolumab (REGONIVO, phase Ib)Refractory MSS mCRC (Japan)ORR approximately 33%-36% in CRC cohort; median PFS approximately 7.9 monthsEarly-phase; later Western studies show lower activity; liver metastases may blunt benefitFukuoka et al[65]
Regorafenib + nivolumab (phase II)Refractory MSS mCRC (multicenter United States)ORR 7% (5/70 PR); median PFS 1.8 months; OS 11.9 monthsAll responders had no liver metastasesFakih et al[66]
Fruquintinib + sintilimabRefractory MSS mCRC (China phase II)ORR 12.5%; DCR 76.4%; median PFS 4.1 months; OS 15.3 monthsLiver mets: PFS 3.2 months vs 7.6 months; NLR/albumin/ECOG predictiveZhang et al[68]
Regorafenib + ipilimumab + nivolumabRefractory MSS mCRC (single-center phase I)ORR 27.6%; median PFS 4.0 months; OS 20 months; non-liver mets ORR 36.4%Responses largely confined to nonliver metastatic disease; dose-related skin/immune AEsXiao et al[69]; Fakih et al[70]
Atezolizumab + cobimetinib (IMblaze370)Refractory mCRC (predominantly MSS; phase III)No OS benefit vs regorafenib; ORR approximately 2%Suggests MEK inhibition alone is insufficient; scheduling/partner choice criticalEng et al[40]
Radiotherapy + ICI (various early-phase)MSS mCRC; often liver-dominant diseaseClinical benefit inconsistent; abscopal responses uncommonDose/fractionation, target lesions, and systemic priming likely determinantsYang et al[91]; Lee et al[92]; Nelson et al[93]; Hang et al[94]
Locoregional therapy + ICI (HIPEC/HAIC/TACE/SIRT; early-phase)Liver or peritoneal metastasesPrimarily early-phase/ongoing; rationale is in situ antigen release and myeloid reprogrammingSafety/sequence critical; endpoints include immune correlativesNelson et al[93]; Nevo et al[95]; Jiang et al[96]
Table 3 Candidate biomarkers for patient selection and monitoring in microsatellite-stable/proficient mismatch repair colorectal cancer
Biomarker
Assay/readout
Rationale in MSS CRC
Clinical application and limitations
Ref.
MSIH/dMMRIHC (MLH1/MSH2/MSH6/PMS2), PCR, NGSHigh neoantigen load and inflamed TMEEstablished selection for PD-1 (± CTLA-4); rare in metastatic CRCGandini et al[130]; Ambrosini et al[131]
TMB-high; POLE/POLD1 ultra-mutationNGS panel; TMB cutoffsMay confer immunogenicity despite MSSIdentifies small ICI-sensitive subset; platform/cutoff heterogeneityXue et al[132]; Domingo et al[135]
PD-L1 expressionIHC (TPS/CPS; immune cell staining)Surrogate of immune activation, but weak predictor in CRCLimited standalone utility; may contribute in combination contextsNakamura et al[137]
Immunoscore/TIL density (CD3/CD8)Standardized IHC quantification (center + invasive margin)Captures pre-existing antitumor immunity; enriches for ICI-responsive biologyPotential for patient selection (e.g., POCHI); requires harmonization and cutoffsYamaguchi et al[60]; Esmail et al[134]
Inflamed vs excluded gene signatures (IFN-γ; TGF-β/stromal)RNA-seq/nano string signaturesDefines immune-hot vs immune-excluded states and matches mechanismsTrial stratification; resource-intensive; signatures not yet standardizedMortezaee and Majidpoor[27]; Li et al[28]; Esmail et al[134]
Liver metastasis statusImaging; metastatic patternLiver promotes systemic immune tolerance and attenuates ICI benefitNegative predictor in multiple ICI + TKI datasets; guides patient selection/Locoregional consolidationFakih et al[66]; Fakih et al[70]; Taïeb et al[138]
ctDNA kineticsPlasma NGS (VAF dynamics; MRD)Early molecular response/resistance signalMonitoring and adaptive strategies; assay and threshold variabilityHou et al[140]
Host inflammatory/nutrition indicesNLR, albumin, ECOGCorrelates with myeloid skewing and immune fitnessAdjunct prognostic/predictive markers (not standalone)Zhang et al[68]
Gut microbiome featuresMetagenomics; targeted qPCR (e.g., Fusobacterium)Microbiota shapes systemic immunity and therapy response/toxicityExploratory; actionable interventions (diet/FMT) under evaluationLuo et al[33]; Luu et al[34]; Ramachandran et al[139]


Write to the Help Desk