4.7 Article

Comprehensive immunological analyses of colorectal cancer patients in the phase I/II study of quickly matured dendritic cell vaccine pulsed with carcinoembryonic antigen peptide

Journal

CANCER IMMUNOLOGY IMMUNOTHERAPY
Volume 60, Issue 11, Pages 1565-1575

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00262-011-1051-1

Keywords

Dendritic cell; Vaccine; Cancer; Clinical study

Funding

  1. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [22590729] Funding Source: KAKEN

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Dendritic cell (DC) vaccine has been used to treat patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). The results of vaccine-induced clinical responses have not always been satisfactory partially because of DC incompetence. In order to evaluate the feasibility of novel mature DCs for therapeutic adjuvants against CRC, we conducted clinical trials with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) peptide-loaded DC quickly generated with a combination of OK432 (Streptococcuspyogenes preparation), prostanoid, and interferon-alpha (OPA-DC). In the ten patients enrolled in this study, the OPA-DC vaccine was well tolerated and administered four times every 2 weeks except for two patients, who were switched to other treatments due to disease progression. Among the eight evaluable patients, one displayed stable disease (SD), while the remaining seven showed progressive disease (PD). In the SD patient, natural killer (NK) cell frequency and cytolytic activity were increased. In the same patient, the frequency of CEA-specific cytotoxic T cells (CTLs) increased stepwise with repetitive vaccinations; however, most of the CTLs exhibited central memory phenotype. In those with PD, NK cells proliferated well regardless of failure of response, whereas CTLs failed to do so. We concluded that the OPA-DC vaccine is well tolerated and has immune-stimulatory capacity in patients with CRC. Additional modulation is needed to attain significant clinical impact.

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