4.7 Article

Efficient inhibition of multidrug-resistant human tumors with a recombinant bispecific anti-P-glycoprotein x anti-CD3 diabody

期刊

LEUKEMIA
卷 18, 期 3, 页码 513-520

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/sj.leu.2403267

关键词

bispecific antibody; diabody; antibody engineering; cytotoxic cell targeting; multidrug resistance; P-glycoprotein; CD3; cancer therapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Overexpressing of P-glycoprotein (Pgp) has been shown to be responsible for cancer resistance to multiple chemotherapeutic agents. Immunotherapy with biological agents, such as bispecific antibodies (BsAbs), may represent a promising approach to overcome the emergence of drug resistance. Here we constructed a recombinant BsAb, a diabody, with specificities to both CD3 on human T-lymphocyte and Pgp on cancer cells. The diabody was produced in Escherichia coli in a soluble functional form and purified by an affinity chromatography with a yield of >4 mg/l culture medium in shaker flask. The diabody binds to both CD3 on T-lymphocytes and Pgp on multidrug-resistant (MDR) tumor cells with affinities that are comparable to its respective parental single chain Fv molecules. In the presence of activated human peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBLs), the diabody mediates effectively the lysis of the Pgp-overexpressing human leukemia K562/A02 and epidermoid carcinoma KBv(200) cells, but is much less potent in mediating the lysis of the parent K562 and KB cells. Further, the diabody localized selectively within the K562/A02 xenografts in mice. When combined with activated PBL, the diabody significantly inhibited the growth of K562/A02 and KBv(200), but had no effect on K562 and KB xenografts. In contrast, treatment with doxorubicin, a standard chemotherapeutic agent, only inhibited the growth of K562 and KB, but had no effect on K562/A02 and KBv(200) xenografts. Taken together, our results suggest that the anti-Pgp x anti-CD3 diabody may have a great potential in the treatment of various MDR cancers.

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