4.8 Article

Neoantigen landscape dynamics during human melanoma-T cell interactions

Journal

NATURE
Volume 536, Issue 7614, Pages 91-+

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/nature18945

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Dutch Cancer Society [UL 2012-5544, NKI 2012-5463, UVA 2010-4822]
  2. Anticancer Fund
  3. Dutch Cancer Society Queen Wilhelmina Award NKI [2013-6122]
  4. Fight Colorectal Cancer-Michael's Mission-AACR Fellowship
  5. Alpe d'HuZes/KWF Bas Mulder Award

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Recognition of neoantigens that are formed as a consequence of DNA damage is likely to form a major driving force behind the clinical activity of cancer immunotherapies such as T-cell checkpoint blockade and adoptive T-cell therapy(1-7). Therefore, strategies to selectively enhance T-cell reactivity against genetically defined neoantigens(1,8-11) are currently under development. In mouse models, T-cell pressure can sculpt the antigenicity of tumours, resulting in the emergence of tumours that lack defined mutant antigens(12,13). However, whether the T-cell-recognized neoantigen repertoire in human cancers is constant over time is unclear. Here we analyse the stability of neoantigen-specific T-cell responses and the antigens they recognize in two patients with stage IV melanoma treated by adoptive T-cell transfer. The T-cell-recognized neoantigens can be selectively lost from the tumour cell population, either by overall reduced expression of the genes or loss of the mutant alleles. Notably, loss of expression of T-cell-recognized neoantigens was accompanied by development of neoantigen-specific T-cell reactivity in tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes. These data demonstrate the dynamic interactions between cancer cells and T cells, which suggest that T cells mediate neoantigen immunoediting, and indicate that the therapeutic induction of broad neoantigen-specific T-cell responses should be used to avoid tumour resistance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available