| Literature DB >> 25625927 |
Benjamin Yang1, Jessica Jeang, Andrew Yang, T C Wu, Chien-Fu Hung.
Abstract
DNA vaccination has emerged as an attractive immunotherapeutic approach against cancer due to its simplicity, stability, and safety. Results from numerous clinical trials have demonstrated that DNA vaccines are well tolerated by patients and do not trigger major adverse effects. DNA vaccines are also very cost effective and can be administered repeatedly for long-term protection. Despite all the practical advantages, DNA vaccines face challenges in inducing potent antigen specific cellular immune responses as a result of immune tolerance against endogenous self-antigens in tumors. Strategies to enhance immunogenicity of DNA vaccines against self-antigens have been investigated including encoding of xenogeneic versions of antigens, fusion of antigens to molecules that activate T cells or trigger associative recognition, priming with DNA vectors followed by boosting with viral vector, and utilization of immunomodulatory molecules. This review will focus on discussing strategies that circumvent immune tolerance and provide updates on findings from recent clinical trials.Entities:
Keywords: APCs, antigen presenting cells; CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen; CIN, cervical intraepithelial neoplasia; CT antigens, cancer-testis antigens; CTLs, cytotoxic lymphocytes; DNA vaccines; DOM, fragment c domain; EP, electroporation; GITR, glucocorticoid-induced tumor necrosis factor receptor family-related genes; HER2, Her2/neu; HSP70, heat shock protein 70; IFNs, interferons; IRF, interferon regulatory factor; Id, idiotype; MHC, major histocompatibility complex; Mam-A, Mammaglobin-A; NHP, non-human primate; PAP, Prostatic acid phosphatase; PMED, particle mediated epidermal delivery; PSMA, prostate-specific membrane antigen; SCT, single-chain trimer; STING, stimulator of interferon genes; TAAs, tumor-associated antigens; TBK1, Tank-binding kinase 1; TLRs, Toll-like receptors; TT, tetanus toxin; Trp2, tyrosinase related protein 2; cellular immune response; hTERT, human telomerase reverse transcriptase; humoral immune response; immune tolerance; phTERT, optimized full-length hTERT; tumor antigens; vaccine delivery
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25625927 PMCID: PMC4514137 DOI: 10.4161/21645515.2014.980686
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Hum Vaccin Immunother ISSN: 2164-5515 Impact factor: 3.452
Figure 1.Immune activation following DNA Vaccination. Intramuscular administration of DNA vaccine leads to transfection of DNA plasmids encoding antigens mainly in myocytes with some transfection in dendritic cells. DNA sensors such as DAI, H2B, IFI16, DDX41, LRRFIP1, and cGAS are able to detect the presence of dsDNA in the cytosol and induce the activation of STING-TBK1 signaling cascade leading to activation of IRF3 and resulting in expression of Type I IFNs. TLR9 can recognize the unmethylated CpG DNA, which through the signaling of MyD88 activates IRF7 also resulting in expression of Type I IFNs. Dendritic cells can pick up the myocyte-expressed antigens through phagocytosis as they get secreted or released following apoptosis. The antigens are then processed and presented through MHC class I to CD8+ T cells in cross-presentation. Interestingly, this process is promoted by Type I IFNs. Alternatively, dendritic cells can be directly transfected and express the antigens, which then can be presented through MHC class I to CD8+ T cells.
Advantages of DNA Vaccine
| Design | Allows for simple and flexible design, can encode a wide range of antigens and immunomodulatory molecules |
| Immunology | Trigger both innate and adaptive immune responses, induce both antibody and cytotoxic mediated cellular immunity, long term antigen production |
| Safety | No risk of pathogenic infection, no clinical adverse effect or toxicity, no production of anti-DNA antibody allowing for repeated administration |
| Stability | Heat stable, easy to store and transport without the need of a cold chain |
| Cost effectiveness | Rapid production, easily engineered, very reproducible, perfect for large scale production and administration |
Human Clinical Trials
| Disease | Antigens | Design | Phase | Outcome | Refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Melanoma | Gp100 | Xenogeneic mouse gp100 or human gp100 | I | Increase in IFNγ+ production in CD8+ T cells against gp100, absence of toxicity | |
| Xenogeneic gp100 delivered by PMED | I | High IFNγ+ CD8+ T cells production, absence of toxicity | |||
| Breast cancer | HER2 | Full length signaling-deficient HER2 gene with low doses of IL-2 and GM-CSF | I | Long-term antibody response, absence of toxicity | |
| Chimeric rat/human HER2 targeted to dendritic cells | I | IFNγ+ production from both CD4+ and CD8+ T cells | |||
| Mam-A | Vaccine encoding Mam-A cDNA | I | Expansion of CD4+ helper T cells expressing IFNγ+, decreased number of regulatory T cells | ||
| Colorectal cancer | CEA | Modified human CEA fused to promiscuous T helper epitope of the tetanus toxoid with cyclophosphamide and GM-CSF | I | Absence of toxicity | |
| Prostate cancer | PAP | PAP with GM-CSF adjuvant | I/II | PAP-specific IFNγ+ CD8+ T cell development, PAP-specific CD4+ and CD8+ T cell proliferation | |
| Multiple boosting enhance the immune responses | |||||
| PSMA | DNA encoding a tumor derived epitope from PSMA fused to a domain of fragment C of tetanus toxin | I/II | Induction of CD4+ T cell help and antibody production, development of PSMA-specific CD8+ T cells | ||
| Cervical cancer | HPV E6/E7 | DNA encoding modified HPV E7 incapable of binding retinoblastoma protein fused to HSP70 and a secretion signal sequence | I | Absence of toxicity | |
| Highly optimized HPV16 and 18 E6/E7 | I | HPV-specific CD8+ T cell responses with cytolytic functionality, absence of toxicity | |||
| HPV16 E6 and E7 | I | Local CD8+ T cell responses in the tumor microenvrionment |