| Literature DB >> 27397612 |
Markus W Löffler1, P Anoop Chandran2, Karoline Laske3, Christopher Schroeder4, Irina Bonzheim5, Mathias Walzer6, Franz J Hilke4, Nico Trautwein2, Daniel J Kowalewski3, Heiko Schuster2, Marc Günder2, Viviana A Carcamo Yañez7, Christopher Mohr8, Marc Sturm4, Huu-Phuc Nguyen4, Olaf Riess4, Peter Bauer9, Sven Nahnsen10, Silvio Nadalin11, Derek Zieker11, Jörg Glatzle12, Karolin Thiel11, Nicole Schneiderhan-Marra7, Stephan Clasen13, Hans Bösmüller14, Falko Fend5, Oliver Kohlbacher15, Cécile Gouttefangeas2, Stefan Stevanović16, Alfred Königsrainer17, Hans-Georg Rammensee16.
Abstract
BACKGROUND & AIMS: We report a novel experimental immunotherapeutic approach in a patient with metastatic intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. In the 5year course of the disease, the initial tumor mass, two local recurrences and a lung metastasis were surgically removed. Lacking alternative treatment options, aiming at the induction of anti-tumor T cells responses, we initiated a personalized multi-peptide vaccination, based on in-depth analysis of tumor antigens (immunopeptidome) and sequencing.Entities:
Keywords: Anti-tumor T cell response; Cholangiocarcinoma; HLA; Immunopeptidome; Immunotherapy; Peptides; Primary liver cancer
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27397612 PMCID: PMC5756536 DOI: 10.1016/j.jhep.2016.06.027
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Hepatol ISSN: 0168-8278 Impact factor: 25.083
Fig. 1Clinical course and therapy. The course of the disease is subdivided in quarters of the year (Q) and the interventions performed (surgery/vaccination) are shown. Clinical imaging results for relevant events are depicted exemplarily in chronological order. Further exemplary imaging results depicting the course of disease can be accessed in Supplementary Figs. 1–15. The multi-peptide vaccination schedule is also indicated chronologically annotated for days (after initiation) and count of vaccinations. Seg, segment; R-classification, R0: no residual tumor; R1: microscopic residual tumor; R2: macroscopic residual tumor; lhs/rhs, left/right hand side; classification of malignant tumours (TNM Classification) (UICC): T = tumor extent (0–4); N = positive lymphnodes (0–1); M = Metastasis (0–1); L = lymphinvasion (0–1); V = venous invasion (0–1); G = grading (1–3); p = histopathological staging; c = clinical staging; Ø diameter; s.c., subcutaneous; i.d., intradermal; nV = nth vaccination.
Composition of the multi-peptide vaccine.
Peptides are listed alongside their sequence, identifier of the core protein, molecular mass and position of the peptide in the respective corresponding source protein and HLA-restrictions of the peptides. Characterization of the patient’s tumor, HLA ligandome analysis (LC-MS/MS) as well as whole transcriptome sequencing (WTS) of two tumor manifestations (L06/10 – primary tumor; P03/13 lung metastasis) are shown with respective FPKM values (fragments per kilobase mapped) for the transcripts of interest. AA (amino acid); RGS (regulator of G-protein signaling); ADFP (adipose differentiation-related protein/Perlipin); CCND (cyclin D); IGFBP (Insulin-like growth factor-binding protein); MMP (matrix metalloproteinase); MS2 (tandem mass spectrometry); Ref. (References).
Fig. 2Tumor characterization. Characterization of the various surgically resected tumors is shown. (A) Tumor location and putative ancestry based on shared driver mutations are indicated with a color code. (B) Tumors were assessed by immunohistochemistry and qualitative staining patterns (− negative; + slightly positive; ++ moderately positive; +++ strongly positive) are given for different immune and tumor markers. Staining for Hep Par 1 and CK7 supported the initial diagnosis of cholangiocarcinoma (L06/10) and staining of P03/13 for thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF1) and Napsin A ruled out a primary lung adenocarcinoma. Further, counts for immune cell infiltrates in the epithelial compartment are given for each tumor and microscopic pictures (×100) of perforin staining are shown. More detailed data is provided in Supplementary Table 2.
Fig. 3Immunomonitoring of patient PBMCs for vaccine induced T cell responses. PBMCs were pre-stimulated using either peptide pool I (RGS-5, ADFP-2, ADFP-3, MMP7-(1) and HIV-A03) or peptide pool II (CCND1, IGFBP3, MMP7-(2) and Filamin-A), and expanded for 12 days using IL-2. (A) 300,000 cells (Class I binding peptides) or 200,000 (for class II binding peptides) were re-stimulated in triplicates (duplicates for pre-vaccination ‘scr’ time point) in an IFN-γ ELISPOT assay using individual peptides. The top panel shows the normalized spot counts for individual peptide stimulations and the bottom panel shows examples of scanned ELISPOT wells. At least 700,000 cells were re-stimulated with the respective peptides, in the presence of Brefeldin A and GolgiStop and 12 h later, intracellular IFN-γ and TNF were stained and analysed for B and C. (B) Exemplary dot plots of IFN-γ and TNF production by CD4(+) cells in response to RGS5 and CCND1 peptides, collected at the 25th vaccination (25V) are shown in the left panel. TNF production by CD8(+) cells in response to MMP7-(1) peptide are shown in the right panel (top). MMP7-(1) multimer staining of the corresponding vaccination time point (13V) is shown in the right panel (bottom). (C) Frequencies of the RGS5 peptide induced cytokine(+) live CD4(+) lymphocytes are shown (left y axis: IFN-γ right y axis: TNF). (D) At least 600,000 cells were analyzed by HLA-peptide multimers (class I). MMP7-(1) multimer(+) cells within live CD4(−) lymphocytes are shown and the % of multimer(+) CD8(+) lymphocytes are indicated.