4.6 Article

Systemic CD8+ T Cell-Mediated Tumoricidal Effects by Intratumoral Treatment of Oncolytic Herpes Simplex Virus with the Agonistic Monoclonal Antibody for Murine Glucocorticoid-Induced Tumor Necrosis Factor Receptor

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 8, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0104669

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology of Japan [24390300, 24800033]
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [24800033, 24390300] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Oncolytic virotherapy combined with immunomodulators is a novel noninvasive strategy for cancer treatment. In this study, we examined the tumoricidal effects of oncolytic HF10, a naturally occurring mutant of herpes simplex virus type-1, combined with an agonistic DTA-1 monoclonal antibody specific for the glucocorticoid-induced tumor necrosis factor receptor. Two murine tumor models were used to evaluate the therapeutic efficacies of HF10 virotherapy combined with DTA-1. The kinetics and immunological mechanisms of DTA-1 in HF10 infection were examined using flow cytometry and immunohistochemistry. Intratumoral administration of HF10 in combination with DTA-1 at a low dose resulted in a more vigorous attenuation of growth of the untreated contralateral as well as the treated tumors than treatment with either HF10 or DTA-1 alone. An accumulation of CD8(+) T cells, including tumor- and herpes simplex virus type-1-specific populations, and a decrease in the number of CD4(+) Foxp3(+) T regulatory cells were seen in both HF10- and DTA-1-treated tumors. Studies using Fc-digested DTA-1 and Fc gamma receptor knockout mice demonstrated the direct participation of DTA-1 in regulatory T cell depletion by antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity primarily via macrophages. These results indicated the potential therapeutic efficacy of a glucocorticoid-induced tumor necrosis factor receptor-specific monoclonal antibody in oncolytic virotherapy at local tumor sites.

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

4.6
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