4.7 Article

Vaccination-induced functional competence of circulating human tumor-specific CD8 T-cells

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER
卷 130, 期 11, 页码 2607-2617

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ijc.26297

关键词

CD8 T-cell effector function; vaccination; CpG oligodeoxynucleotides; Melan-A; MART-1 peptide; melanoma

类别

资金

  1. Swiss Cancer League/Oncosuisse [02279-08-2008]
  2. Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research
  3. Cancer Research Institute (USA)
  4. Cancer Vaccine Collaborative, Atlantic Philanthropies (USA)
  5. Wilhelm Sander-Foundation (Germany)
  6. Swiss National Science Foundation
  7. Swiss National Center of Competence in Research (NCCR) Molecular Oncology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

T-cells specific for foreign (e.g., viral) antigens can give rise to strong protective immune responses, whereas self/tumor antigen-specific T-cells are thought to be less powerful. However, synthetic T-cell vaccines composed of Melan-A/MART-1 peptide, CpG and IFA can induce high frequencies of tumor-specific CD8 T-cells in PBMC of melanoma patients. Here we analyzed the functionality of these T-cells directly ex vivo, by multiparameter flow cytometry. The production of multiple cytokines (IFN?, TNFa, IL-2) and upregulation of LAMP-1 (CD107a) by tumor (Melan-A/MART-1) specific T-cells was comparable to virus (EBV-BMLF1) specific CD8 T-cells. Furthermore, phosphorylation of STAT1, STAT5 and ERK1/2, and expression of CD3 zeta chain were similar in tumor- and virus-specific T-cells, demonstrating functional signaling pathways. Interestingly, high frequencies of functionally competent T-cells were induced irrespective of patient's age or gender. Finally, CD8 T-cell function correlated with disease-free survival. However, this result is preliminary since the study was a Phase I clinical trial. We conclude that human tumor-specific CD8 T-cells can reach functional competence in vivo, encouraging further development and Phase III trials assessing the clinical efficacy of robust vaccination strategies.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据