4.7 Article

Direct Loading of iTEP-Delivered CTL Epitope onto MHC Class I Complexes on the Dendritic Cell Surface

期刊

MOLECULAR PHARMACEUTICS
卷 14, 期 10, 页码 3312-3321

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.7b00367

关键词

iTEP; CTL vaccine; epitope; MHC-I; MMP; DC presentation; direct loading

资金

  1. University of Utah Flow Cytometry
  2. University of Utah
  3. Huntsman Cancer Institute [170301]
  4. NIH [CA EB024083]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Crotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL)-mediated immune responses are the primary defense mechanism against cancer and infection. CTL epitope peptides have been used as vaccines to boost CTL responses; however, the efficacy of these peptides is suboptimal. Under current vaccine formulation and delivery strategies, these vaccines are delivered into and processed inside antigen-presenting cells such as dendritic cells (DCs). However, the intracellular process is not efficient, which at least partially contributes to the suboptimal efficacy of the vaccines. Thus, we hypothesized that directly loading epitopes onto MHC class I complexes (MHC-Is) on the DC surface would significantly improve the efficacy of the epitopes because the direct loading bypasses inefficient intra-DC vaccine processing. To test the hypothesis, we designed an immune-tolerant elastin-like polypeptide (iTEP)-delivered CTL vaccine containing a metalloproteinase-9 (MMP-9)-sensitive peptide and an CTL epitope peptide. We found that the epitope was released from this MMP-sensitive vaccine through cleavage by DC-secreted MMP-9 outside of the DCs. The released epitopes were directly loaded onto MHC-Is on the DC surface. Ultimately, the MMP-sensitive vaccine strikingly increased epitope presentation by DCs by 7-fold and enhanced the epitope-specific CD8+ T-cell response by as high as 9.6-fold compared to the vaccine that was uncleavable by MMP. In summary, this novel direct-loading strategy drastically boosted vaccine efficacy. This study offered a new avenue to enhance CTL vaccines.

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