4.6 Article

SCIB2, an antibody DNA vaccine encoding NY-ESO-1 epitopes, induces potent antitumor immunity which is further enhanced by checkpoint blockade

期刊

ONCOIMMUNOLOGY
卷 5, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/2162402X.2016.1169353

关键词

Cancer immunotherapy; CD4(+) T cells; CD8(+) T cells; targeting antigen-presenting cells; NY-ESO-1

资金

  1. Scancell Ltd.
  2. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [26290059] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Checkpoint blockade has demonstrated promising antitumor responses in approximately 10-40% of patients. However, the majority of patients do not make a productive immune response to their tumors and do not respond to checkpoint blockade. These patients may benefit from an effective vaccine that stimulates high-avidity T cell responses in combination with checkpoint blockade. We have previously shown that incorporating TRP-2 and gp100 epitopes into the CDR regions of a human IgG1 DNA (ImmunoBody (R): IB) results in significant tumor regression both in animal models and patients. This vaccination strategy is superior to others as it targets antigen to antigen-presenting cells and stimulates high-avidity T cell responses. To broaden the application of this vaccination strategy, 16 NY-ESO-1 epitopes, covering over 80% of HLA phenotypes, were incorporated into the IB (SCIB2). They produced higher frequency and avidity T cell responses than peptide vaccination. These T cells were of sufficient avidity to kill NY-ESO-1-expressing tumor cells, and in vivo controlled the growth of established B16-NY-ESO- 1 tumors, resulting in long-term survival (35%). When SCIB2 was given in combination with Treg depletion, CTLA-4 blockade or PD-1 blockade, long-term survival from established tumors was significantly enhanced to 56, 67 and 100%, respectively. Translating these responses into the clinic by using a combination of SCIB2 vaccination and checkpoint blockade can only further improve clinical responses.

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