4.6 Article

Systemic treatment with CAR-engineered T cells against PSCA delays subcutaneous tumor growth and prolongs survival of mice

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-14-30

关键词

CAR T cells; PSCA; Genetic engineering; Prostate cancer; Adoptive transfer

类别

资金

  1. Swedish Cancer Society [12 0569]
  2. Gunnar Nilsson's Cancer Foundation
  3. Swedish Children Cancer Foundation [PROJ10/027]
  4. Marcus and Marianne Wallenberg's Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Adoptive transfer of T cells genetically engineered with a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) has successfully been used to treat both chronic and acute lymphocytic leukemia as well as other hematological cancers. Experimental therapy with CAR-engineered T cells has also shown promising results on solid tumors. The prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA) is a protein expressed on the surface of prostate epithelial cells as well as in primary and metastatic prostate cancer cells and therefore a promising target for immunotherapy of prostate cancer. Methods: We developed a third-generation CAR against PSCA including the CD28, OX-40 and CD3 zeta signaling domains. T cells were transduced with a lentivirus encoding the PSCA-CAR and evaluated for cytokine production (paired Student's t-test), proliferation (paired Student's t-test), CD107a expression (paired Student's t-test) and target cell killing in vitro and tumor growth and survival in vivo (Log-rank test comparing Kaplan-Meier survival curves). Results: PSCA-CAR T cells exhibit specific interferon (IFN)-gamma and interleukin (IL)-2 secretion and specific proliferation in response to PSCA-expressing target cells. Furthermore, the PSCA-CAR-engineered T cells efficiently kill PSCA-expressing tumor cells in vitro and systemic treatment with PSCA-CAR-engineered T cells significantly delays subcutaneous tumor growth and prolongs survival of mice. Conclusions: Our data confirms that PSCA-CAR T cells may be developed for treatment of prostate cancer.

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