| Literature DB >> 33968058 |
Estéfani García-Ríos1, Marcos Nuévalos1, Francisco J Mancebo1, Pilar Pérez-Romero1.
Abstract
During the last decade, many studies have demonstrated the role of CMV specific T-cell immune response on controlling CMV replication and dissemination. In fact, it is well established that transplanted patients lacking CMV-specific T-cell immunity have an increased occurrence of CMV replication episodes and CMV-related complications. In this context, the use of adoptive transfer of CMV-specific T-cells has been widely investigated and applied to Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant patients and may be useful as a therapeutic alternative, to reconstitute the CMV specific T-cell response and to control CMV viremia in patients receiving a transplantation. However, only few authors have explored the use of T-cell adoptive transfer in SOT recipients. We propose a novel review in which we provide an overview of the impact of using CMV-specific T-cell adoptive transfer on the control of CMV infection in SOT recipients, the different approaches to stimulate, isolate and expand CMV-specific T-cells developed over the years and a discussion of the possible use of CMV adoptive cellular therapy in this SOT population. Given the timeliness and importance of this topic, we believe that such an analysis will provide important insights into CMV infection and its treatment/prevention.Entities:
Keywords: CMV treatment; CMV-specific immune response; T-cell adoptive transfer; cellular therapy; cytomegalovirus
Year: 2021 PMID: 33968058 PMCID: PMC8104120 DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.657144
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Immunol ISSN: 1664-3224 Impact factor: 7.561
List of available works of CMV-specific T-cell transfer in SOT.
| Method | Organ and D/R status | Number of infused cells | Number of infusions | Cell line phenotype | Stimulation method | Post-infusion clinical outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Direct selection by IFN-γ capture | 1 Lung | Fresh 1 × 107
| 2 | 95% CD3+ cells with 2.7% and 92.3% CD4+ and CD8+ cells. No CD16+ natural killer cells and only 0.1% CD19+ B cells | Overlapping IE-1/pp65 peptide pools | No side effects occurred after the infusion. The number of CMV-specific T-cells increased, while viral load decreased. The patient died from graft failure |
|
| 1 Kidney | Frozen 1.6 x107
| 1 | 16.6% CD4+ and 79.4% CD8+ cells | Overlapping pp65 peptide pool | The patient developed a mild fever but no other adverse effects were noted and within 4 months his CMV viral load decreased from >5×106 copies to 682 copies/mL and remained controlled up to 1 year |
| Autologous | 1 Lung | Fresh | 4 | 82.6% CD3+ cells, including 14% CD4+ and 73.8% CD8+ cells | PBMC coated with HLA class I-restricted CMV | Decrease in viral load. No graft rejection |
| Autologous | 1 Lung | Frozen two of 1.9 x107 cells and one of 22.2 x 106 T-cells | 3 | Two first infusions 41.6% CD8+ cells | HLA Class I restricted epitopes from pp65, pp50 and IE-1 | The patient did not have any documented rejection or acute change in lung function after the T-cell infusions but finally died due to clinical complications unrelated to CMV |
| Autologous | 13 kidney, 8 lung and 1 heart | Frozen 22.2-245 × 106 T-cells | 6 | 20% CD4+ and 70% CD8+ cells | HLA class I– and class II–restricted epitopes from pp65, pp50, IE-1, gH, and gB | None of the patients who received adoptive CMV-specific T-cell therapy showed treatment-related grade 3, 4, or 5 adverse events. Reduction or resolution of CMV reactivation and/or disease and improved response to antiviral drug therapy |
Figure 1Strategies for the generation of CMV-specific T-cells. (A) Ex vivo T-cell expansion requires the in vitro stimulation and expansion of T-cells using APCs presenting viral peptides or proteins. (B) Direct selection employs virus-derived peptide specific multimers in the setting of a HLA class-I molecule, viral antigen T-cell stimulation followed by cytokine expressing T-cell selection using antibody coated immunomagnetic beads or activation marker selection based on the detection of specific surface molecules that are selectively expressed or strongly up-regulated after T-cell activation. (C) Genetic manipulation requires gene transfer of high affinity CMV-specific T-cell receptors (TCR) or chimeric-antigen receptors (CAR) to change specificity of T-cells to CMV antigens. This figure was created using BioRender.com.
Characteristics of the T-cell therapies available.
| Method | System | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| No restricted by HLA type; small blood volume required; naïve donor can be used; generation of polyclonal T-cells | Extensive culture period; seropositive donors required | |
|
| pMHC multimer | No needed extensive | Restricted by HLA type and streptamer; seropositive donors required; high frequency of specific T-cells needed; select for a limited repertoire of CD8+ cells |
| Cytoquine capture | No needed extensive ex vivo manipulation and undergo rapid expansion | Requires seropositive donors; large blood volumes needed | |
| Activation marker | Rapid detection and enrichment of T-cells; broader repertoire of antigen-specific T-cells; Compatible with other assay formats; not restricted by HLA; not needed previous information of immunodominant epitopes; no specialized APC such as dendritic cells are needed | Time-consuming and difficulty to isolate and expand functional cells; identification of novel T-cell epitopes often requires screening of a high number of epitopes | |
|
| CAR-T | Recognize antigens in an HLA-independent manner; target conserved and essential epitopes; infused to a broad range of patients irrespective of HLA | Only surface antigens can be targeted; restricted by epitope; expensive; Several toxicities |
| TCR-T | Wider range of targets; high affinity for specific antigens through genetic engineering; strong activation when a small amount of antigen is present; use of natural T-cell signaling mechanisms | Expensive; time- and labor-consuming; MHC restricted and depends on presentation by MHC molecules to recognize targets and activate T cell function; risk of hybridization (mismatch) between exogenous and endogenous chains | |