4.5 Article

Lactate Dehydrogenase A Depletion Alters MyC-CaP Tumor Metabolism, Microenvironment, and CAR T Cell Therapy

期刊

MOLECULAR THERAPY-ONCOLYTICS
卷 18, 期 -, 页码 382-395

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.omto.2020.07.006

关键词

-

资金

  1. Department of Radiology of MSKCC
  2. NIH [R01 CA163980, R01 CA204924, R01 CA215136, P30 CA008748, R50 CA221810, R01 CA220524-01A1, R21 CA213139 01A1]
  3. DOD BCRP [BC161705]
  4. Breast and Molecular Imaging Fund, Evelyn H. Lauder Breast Center

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To enhance human prostate-specific membrane antigen (hPSMA)-specific chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy in a hPSMA(+) MyC-CaP tumor model, we studied and imaged the effect of lactate dehydrogenase A (LDH-A) depletion on the tumor microenvironment (TME) and tumor progression. Effective LDH-A short hairpin RNA (shRNA) knockdown (KD) was achieved in MyC-CaP:hPSMA(+) Renilla luciferase (RLuc)-internal ribosome entry site (IRES)-GFP tumor cells, and changes in tumor cell metabolism and in the TME were monitored. LDH-A downregulation significantly inhibited cell proliferation and subcutaneous tumor growth compared to control cells and tumors. However, total tumor lactate concentration did not differ significantly between LDH-A knockdown and control tumors, reflecting the lower vascularity, blood flow, and clearance of lactate from LDH-A knockdown tumors. Comparing treatment responses of MyCCaP tumors with LDH-A depletion and/or anti-hPSMA CAR T cells showed that the dominant effect on tumor growth was LDH-A depletion. With anti-hPSMA CART cell treatment, tumor growth was significantly slower when combined with tumor LDH-A depletion and compared to control tumor growth (p < 0.0001). The lack of a complete tumor response in our animal model can be explained in part by (1) the lower activity of human CAR T cells against hPSMA-expressing murine tumors in a murine host, and (2) a loss of hPSMA antigen from the tumor cell surface in progressive generations of tumor cells.

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

4.5
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