4.2 Article

Characterization and Comparison of Standard' and Young' Tumour-Infiltrating Lymphocytes for Adoptive Cell Therapy at a Danish Translational Research Institution

期刊

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 75, 期 2, 页码 157-167

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-3083.2011.02640.x

关键词

-

资金

  1. Aase and Ejnar Danielsens Foundation
  2. Danish Cancer Society
  3. Lundbeck Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adoptive cell therapy (ACT) with ex vivo expanded tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) in combination with IL-2 is an effective treatment for metastatic melanoma. Modified protocols of cell expansion may allow the treatment of most enrolled patients and improve the efficacy of adoptively transferred cells. The aims of this study were to establish and validate the novel Young TIL method at our institution and perform a head-to-head comparison of clinical-grade products generated with this protocol opposed to the conventional Standard TIL, which we are currently using in a pilot ACT trial for patients with melanoma. Our results confirm that Young TILs display an earlier differentiation state, with higher CD27 and lower CD56 expression. In addition, CD8+ TILs expressing CD27 had longer telomeres compared with the CD27-. A recently described subset of NK cells, endowed with a high expression of CD56 (CD56bright), was detected for the first time in both types of cultures but at a higher frequency on Young TILs. Young and Standard TILs reactivity against autologous tumours was similar, with significant expression of TNF-a/IFN-?/CD107a by CD8+ TILs detected in all cultures analysed. However, either slow expansion with high-dose IL-2 only or large numerical expansion with a rapid expansion protocol, which is required for current therapeutic protocols, significantly modified TIL phenotype by reducing the frequency of less differentiated, cancer-specific TILs. These studies further support the adoption of the Young TIL method in our current ACT trial and highlight the importance of continuous quality control of expansion protocols.

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

4.2
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