4.6 Article

Divergent therapeutic and immunologic effects of oligodeoxynucleotides with distinct CpG motifs

期刊

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
卷 167, 期 9, 页码 4878-4886

出版社

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.167.9.4878

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R01 CA77764, P01 CA66570] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NHLBI NIH HHS [T32 HL07344] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK25295] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Immune stimulatory oligodeoxynucleotides (ODN) with unmethylated CpG motifs are potent inducers of both innate and adaptive immunity. It initially appeared that a single type of optimal CpG motif would work in all applications. We now report that specific motifs of CpG ODN can vary dramatically in their ability to induce individual immune effects and that these differences impact on their antitumor activity in different tumor models. In particular, a distinct type of CpG motif, which has a chimeric backbone in combination with poly(G) tails, is a potent inducer of NK lytic activity but has little effect on cytokine secretion or B cell proliferation. One such NK-optimized CpG ODN (1585) can induce regression of established melanomas in mice. Surprisingly, no such therapeutic effects were seen with CpG ODN optimized for activation of B cells and Th1-like cytokine expression (ODN 1826). The therapeutic effects of CpG 1585 in melanoma required the presence of NK but not T or B cells and were not associated with the induction of a tumor-specific memory response. In contrast, CpG 1826, but not CpG 1585, was effective at inducing regression of the EL4 murine lymphoma; this rejection was associated with the induction of a memory response and although NK cells were necessary, they were not sufficient. These results demonstrate that selection of optimal CpG ODN for cancer immunotherapy depends upon a careful analysis of the cellular specificities of various CpG motifs and an understanding of the cellular mechanisms responsible for the antitumor activity in a particular tumor.

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