| Literature DB >> 25406933 |
Lorea Beloki1, Miriam Ciaurriz2, Cristina Mansilla3, Amaya Zabalza4, Estela Perez-Valderrama5, Edward R Samuel6, Mark W Lowdell7, Natalia Ramirez8, Eduardo Olavarria9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cytomegalovirus (CMV)-specific T cell infusion to immunocompromised patients following allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation (allo-HSCT) is able to induce a successful anti-viral response. These cells have classically been manufactured from steady-state apheresis samples collected from the donor in an additional harvest prior to G-CSF mobilization, treatment that induces hematopoietic stem cell (HSC) mobilization to the periphery. However, two closely-timed cellular collections are not usually available in the unrelated donor setting, which limits the accessibility of anti-viral cells for adoptive immunotherapy. CMV-specific cytotoxic T cell (CTL) manufacture from the same G-CSF mobilized donor stem cell harvest offers great regulatory advantages, but the isolation using MHC-multimers is hampered by the high non-specific binding to myeloid progenitors, which reduces the purity of the cellular product.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25406933 PMCID: PMC4243324 DOI: 10.1186/s12967-014-0317-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Transl Med ISSN: 1479-5876 Impact factor: 5.531
Figure 1Phenotypic analysis of cells before and after the adherence process. Plastic adherence method was applied to PBMCs from G-CSF mobilized donors (n = 11) and CD14, CD3, CD8, CD4 and 7-ADD expression of the unmanipulated PBMCs and the non-adherent cells were analyzed by flow cytometry (a). Representative figure of the products before and after the adherent process (b). Cells are presented from the CD45+ cell gate.
Phenotypic characterization and CMV-specific CTL isolation of unmanipulated PBMCs and the non-adherent fraction
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
|
| 47.8% (36.0 – 55.0) | 2.1% (1.3 – 6.1) | 0.005 |
|
| 24.0% (18.0 – 37.1) | 69.9% (31.9 – 79.2) | 0.007 |
|
| 17.7% (6.8 – 25.1) | 35.2% (23.8 – 45.2) | 0.009 |
|
| 12.5% (11.4 – 19.4) | 19.3% (16.6 – 29.6) | 0.208 |
|
| 98.0% (95.6 – 98.5) | 96.0% (93.4 – 97.8) | 0.066 |
|
| |||
|
| 0.14% (0.06 – 0.62) | 0.65% (0.24 – 1.51) | 0.003 |
|
| 0.56% (0.41 – 0.86) | 0.16% (0.12 – 0.37) | 0.003 |
|
| |||
|
| 20.8% (6.9 – 61.7) | 76.0% (32.7 – 83.7) | 0.043 |
|
| 38.6% (32.9 – 44.8) | 42.1% (23.4 – 84.1) | 0.893 |
Cell subsets, CMV-specific CTLs and non-specific PM staining were analyzed in the unmanipulated PBMC sample and in the non-adherent cells (n = 11). CMV-specific CTLs were isolated from unmanipulated PBMCs and non-adherent fraction, and purity and yield of the obtained cellular product were determined (n = 5). Comparison was done with the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and significance level was fixed to p < 0.05.
Figure 2PM staining before and after the adherence process. Plastic adherence method was applied to PBMCs from G-CSF mobilized donors (n = 11) and PM+ cells were quantified in unmanipulated PBMCs and the non-adherent cell fraction. Specific (CD3+CD8+PM+) and non-specific (CD8-PM+) PM binding was analyzed. Percentages were analyzed from CD45+ cell gate.
Figure 3CMV-specific CTL isolation using Pentamer. CMV-specific CTLs were isolated from unmanipulated PBMCs and the non-adherent fraction using PM (n = 5) and the purity and yield of the process were determined (a). Representative histograms of CMV-specific CTL isolation (b). Displayed cells were previously gated on CD45+ cells.