4.7 Article

Immune responses to p53 in patients with cancer:enrichment in tetramer+p53 peptide-specific T cells and regulatory T cells at tumor sites

Journal

CANCER IMMUNOLOGY IMMUNOTHERAPY
Volume 54, Issue 11, Pages 1072-1081

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00262-005-0670-9

Keywords

TIL; tetramers; wt p53 epitopes; CD4+CD25+T cells; regulatory T cells (Treg); tumor escape

Funding

  1. NIDCR NIH HHS [P01-DE12321, P60-DE13059] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: A majority of human cancers, including head and neck cancer (HNC), overexpress p53. Although T cells specific for wild-type (wt) sequence p53 peptides are detectable in the peripheral blood of patients with HNC, it is unknown whether such T cells accumulate in tumor-involved tissues. Also, the localization of regulatory T cells (Treg) to tumor sites in HNC has not been investigated to date. Methods: Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL), tumor-involved or non-involved lymph node lymphocytes (LNL) and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) were obtained from 24 HLA-A2.1+ patients with HNC. Using tetramers and four-color flow cytometry, the frequency of Treg and CD3+CD8+ T cells specific for wt p53 epitopes as well as their functional attributes were determined. Results: The CD3+CD8+ tetramer+ cell frequency was significantly higher (P < 0.001) in TIL than autologous PBMC as was the percentage of CD4+CD25+ T cells (P < 0.003). TIL were enriched in FOXp3+, GITR+ and CTLA-4+ Treg. CD8+ TIL had low Zeta expression and produced little IFN gamma after ex vivo stimulation relative to autologous PBMC or PBMC from NC. Conclusions: Anti-wt p53 epitope-specific T cells and Treg preferentially localize to tumor sites in patients with HNC. However, despite enrichment in tumor peptide-specific T cells, the effector cell population (CD3+CD8+) in TIL or PBMC was unresponsive to activation in the tumor microenvironment enriched in Treg.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available