4.4 Article

Lambda phage nanoparticles displaying HER2-derived E75 peptide induce effective E75-CD8+ T response

Journal

IMMUNOLOGIC RESEARCH
Volume 66, Issue 1, Pages 200-206

Publisher

HUMANA PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1007/s12026-017-8969-0

Keywords

Phage display; E75 peptide; Lambda (lambda); lambda F7; HER2/neu protein

Categories

Funding

  1. Mashhad University of Medical Sciences (MUMS)
  2. NSERC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We have investigated the in vitro immunogenicity and in vivo prophylactic and therapeutic potential of lambda (lambda) phage particles displaying the E75 peptide (derived from HER2 protein) in an implantable TUBO breast tumor model of BALB/c mice. The mice were immunized with the E75-displaying phage (lambda F7-gpD::E75) every 2-week intervals over a 6-week period, and the generated immune responses were studied. Results showed in vitro induction of immune responses by the lambda F7 (gpD::E75) construct compared to the control lambda F7 and buffer groups. In the in vivo prophylactic study, all the control and vaccinated mice groups developed tumors. However, in the therapeutic experiments, we observed a significant difference in tumor size at days 14-36 for mice immunized with lambda F7 (gpD::E75) compared to control groups (P < 0.05). Moreover, the survival time prolonged in mice immunized with lambda F7 (gpD::E75). The discrepancy between the results obtained from the in vitro and in vivo studies may have been a result of the induction of Foxp3 CD4(+)CD25(+) which has been previously reported to hamper effective T cell functionality. In conclusion, we observed a significant immune stimulatory response in the in vitro study, while in vivo, the vaccine was not able to exert significant tumor inhibitory effects. We suggest that the presence of Foxp3(+) CD4(+)CD25(+) cells may have impaired the anti-tumor response in mice challenged in vivo with the TUBO xenograft tumor.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available