Extended Data Fig. 8: Evaluation of the lymphoid and myeloid compartments in CRPC treated with ciforadenant or DMSO control.

(a) Quantification of the frequency (left) or number (right) of CD8⁺ T cells in CRPC developed in mice treated with ciforadenant (10 mg/kg; n = 6) or DMSO vehicle control (n = 5) from the same experiments as in Fig. 5b. (b-c) (b) Representative flow cytometry plots and (c) quantification of the frequency of CD8⁺ T cells exhibiting exhaustion states (CD38⁺PD-1⁺) from the same experiments as in Fig. 5b (P = 0.01). (d) Quantification of the number of the indicated major myeloid subsets from the same experiments as in Fig. 5b. (e) Representative immunofluorescent images of Spp1^hi-TAMs in CRPC developed in either Spp1-EGFP negative (left) or positive mice treated with either DMSO (middle) or ciforadenant (right). Immunostaining for F4/80 (turquoise), Spp1 (magenta), and DAPI (blue) is shown. Scale bars, 10 μm. White arrows indicate Spp1^hi-TAMs. (f) Quantification of the frequency of Spp1^hi-TAMs in CRPC developed in mice treated with ciforadenant or DMSO vehicle control (P < 0.001). (g) Quantification of the number of the indicated macrophage subsets in CRPC developed in mice treated with ciforadenant or DMSO vehicle control from the same experiments as in Fig. 5b. (h) UMAP plot showing enrichment scores for the “AdenoSig” gene signatures across myeloid cells in human prostate cancer. (i) Plot depicts the correlations between enrichment scores for the gene signatures “SPP1^hi-TAMs” and “AdenoSig” in patient samples. Localized disease, HSPC, and mCRPC are in gray, blue, and red, respectively. The best-fit line is displayed, and individual patient samples are represented by circles. Bars represent the mean + SEM throughout this figure; symbols represent individual mice. Statistical significance was determined by (a, c, d, f, g) two-sided unpaired Student’s t-tests, and (i) a simple linear regression analysis; P-values: *<0.05, ***<0.001. ns, not significant.