Tingxi Guo1, Dacheng Ma1, Timothy K Lu1,2,3,4. 1. Synthetic Biology Group, Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States. 2. Synthetic Biology Center, Department of Biological Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States. 3. Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, United States. 4. Senti Biosciences, South San Francisco, California 94080, United States.
Abstract
Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies demonstrate the clinical potential of lymphocytes engineered with synthetic properties. However, CAR-T cells are ineffective in most solid tumors, partly due to inadequate activation of the infused lymphocytes at the site of malignancy. To selectively enhance antitumor efficacy without exacerbating off-target toxicities, CAR-T cells can be engineered to preferentially deliver immunostimulatory payloads in tumors. Here, we report a novel antigen-inducible promoter for conditional payload expression in primary human T cells. In therapeutic T cell models, the novel NR4A-based promoter induced higher reporter gene expression than the conventional NFAT-based promoter under weakly immunogenic conditions, where payload expression is most needed. Minimal activity was detected from the inducible promoters in the absence of antigen and after withdrawal of stimulation. As a functional proof-of-concept, we used the NR4A-based promoter to express cytokines in an antimesothelin CAR-T model with suboptimal stimulation and observed improved proliferation compared to T cells engineered with the conventional NFAT promoter or CAR alone. Our system achieves CAR-directed payload expression under weakly immunogenic conditions and could enable the next generation of cell therapies with enhanced antitumor efficacy.
Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-T cell therapies demonstrate the clinical potential of lymphocytes engineered with synthetic properties. However, CAR-T cells are ineffective in most solid tumors, partly due to inadequate activation of the infused lymphocytes at the site of malignancy. To selectively enhance antitumor efficacy without exacerbating off-target toxicities, CAR-T cells can be engineered to preferentially deliver immunostimulatory payloads in tumors. Here, we report a novel antigen-inducible promoter for conditional payload expression in primary human T cells. In therapeutic T cell models, the novel NR4A-based promoter induced higher reporter gene expression than the conventional NFAT-based promoter under weakly immunogenic conditions, where payload expression is most needed. Minimal activity was detected from the inducible promoters in the absence of antigen and after withdrawal of stimulation. As a functional proof-of-concept, we used the NR4A-based promoter to express cytokines in an antimesothelin CAR-T model with suboptimal stimulation and observed improved proliferation compared to T cells engineered with the conventional NFAT promoter or CAR alone. Our system achieves CAR-directed payload expression under weakly immunogenic conditions and could enable the next generation of cell therapies with enhanced antitumor efficacy.
Genetically,
programming cell functions with synthetic components
holds promise for a variety of clinical applications.[1,2] A notable example is the adoptive transfer of T lymphocytes engineered
with a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) to treat cancer.[3−5] However, the consistent clinical benefit of these therapies has
been largely limited to hematological malignancies. Most carcinomas
remain nonresponsive to CAR-T cells because the suppressive tumor
microenvironment and variable antigen density prevent adequate activation
of lymphocytes.[6−8] Amplifying the suboptimal responses of therapeutic
T cells without exacerbating immune-mediated toxicity is a major unmet
need for the treatment of solid tumors.Beyond antigen receptors,
adoptively transferred antitumor T cells
can also be engineered to produce immunostimulatory payloads.[9] This strategy to augment immune responses can
enhance the therapeutic properties of the infused T cells and reinvigorate
endogenous immune cells. In preclinical models, T cells engineered
to secrete common γ chain cytokines IL-2, IL-7, IL-15, and IL-21;[10] inflammatory cytokines IL-12,[11] IL-18,[12] and IL-23;[13] or other protein-based therapeutics[14,15] have demonstrated superior tumor control compared to nonproducers.
The continuous secretion of stimulatory payloads, however, may counteract
their beneficial effects. In one case, human T cells engineered to
constitutively produce IL-15 resulted in the transformation of transductants
in an IL-15 receptor-dependent manner.[16] Constitutive production of potent cytokines such as IL-2 or IL-18
also caused toxicities in preclinical CAR-T models.[10,12] These observations highlight the need to tightly control recombinant
payload production and, ideally, restrict it to the tumor site to
maximize its clinical benefit and prevent unwanted side effects.[17]Synthetic promoters are capable of controlling
and tuning transgene
expression in response to a cellular pathway of interest.[18−20] A sensitive, antigen-inducible promoter with low background activity
could leverage the preferential tumor reactivity of therapeutic receptors
for localized payload delivery. The conventional approach for antigen-dependent
transgene expression has been to use an NFAT-based promoter[21] encoding an NFAT/AP1 response element derived
from the human IL-2 enhancer.[22] This NFAT
promoter was tested in the clinic to drive inducible expression of
IL-12 and was transduced to ex vivo expanded tumor-infiltrating
lymphocytes.[23] Toxicities were still observed
after infusion, possibly because of the nonlocalized production of
IL-12 by T cells with unknown antigen specificities. Subsequent preclinical
developments have focused on combining the antigen-inducible NFAT
promoter with a recombinant receptor[17,24] to better
control the input signal for conditional payload expression. Despite
its broad use, the standard NFAT promoter may not be the optimal choice
for payload delivery.Here, we identified a novel synthetic
promoter based on an NR4A-binding
motif that induced greater responses than the conventional NFAT promoter
under weakly stimulatory conditions, which is when immune-enhancing
molecules are most needed. Incorporating this synthetic promoter with
a CAR in a lentiviral vector achieved automated payload response via
sensing of the cognate tumor antigen. The engineered T cells respond
to targets in an antigen-dependent manner and conditionally express
a transgene of choice upon antigen engagement. The inducible promoter
and vector design described here could enable future generations of
synthetic lymphocytes, with controllable input and output to safely
enhance therapeutic responses.
Results and Discussion
Novel Antigen-Inducible
Promoter Encoding an NR4A-Binding Motif
We previously generated
a synthetic promoter library termed Synthetic
Promoters with Enhanced Cell-State Specificity (SPECS), based on transcription
factor (TF) binding motifs found in public databases. SPECS vectors
were constructed by encoding repeated TF binding sites upstream of
a minimal promoter derived from the adenoviral major late promoter
(MLP) and mKate as the fluorescent reporter.[25] In the present study, to identify novel antigen receptor-inducible
promoters from this library, we selected individual candidate promoters
encoding binding sites for known TFs directly downstream of T cell
receptor (TCR) signaling pathways (i.e., NFkB and MAPK targets),[22,26−32] or TFs upregulated upon TCR-induced activation.[33−40] TF binding site sequences ranged from 77 to 126 base pairs (bp)
(Table S1). Twenty promoter vectors were
individually transduced into primary human T cells by lentivirus and
stimulated with plate-bound CD3 agonist OKT3, or left untreated as
a control (Figure S1a). CD4 and CD8 T cell
subsets responded similarly to OKT3 (Figure S1b). Among the tested promoters, the one encoding an NR4A-binding motif
induced a high percentage of reporter positive cells (Figure S1b,d) and was selected for characterization.
An AP1-based promoter was also chosen for comparison, given that it
also induced a high response and that the AP1 pathway is well established
in T cell activation.[41] As an internal
positive control, antigen-mediated CD137 upregulation[42] was measured in all assays to ensure similar activation
among experiments (Figure S1c).Next,
we compared SPECS-derived NR4A and AP1 promoters with the conventional
NFAT promoter for OKT3-inducible responses. To facilitate quantitative
comparisons, we introduced a second downstream transcription module
into the lentiviral vector. In this module, the constitutive EFS promoter
drives the expression of truncated CD271 (tCD271) to mark transduced
cells. The EFS promoter was chosen for its compact size (∼200
bp) and low enhancer-like activity.[43] We
also tested an additional synthetic minimal promoter (SMP)[44] in combination with each of the three response
elements (Figure a).
The SMP and a similar variant enabled robust inducible promoter activity
in human cells.[19,24] All of the promoter vectors transduced
cells with comparable efficiency at ∼60–80% (Figure S2a). As a negative control vector, we
cloned the EFS-tCD271 module alone, without inducible promoters or
mKate. All of the tested promoters responded similarly to the CD3
agonist among CD4 and CD8 subsets of primary human T cells after 1
day of stimulation (Figure b). In certain donors or in a TF-dependent context, SMP performed
better than MLP, although the two minimal promoters performed similarly
well in most cases (Figure b,c). Thus, subsequent experiments were performed with SMP
as the minimal promoter. No significant baseline activity in the absence
of stimulation was observed with any of the inducible promoters (Figure b). Using a set of
vectors with only a minimal promoter sequence upstream of mKate, we
did not detect enhancer-like activity from the constitutive EFS promoter
at the steady state or after activation, regardless of the choice
of a minimal promoter (Figure S3).
Figure 1
NFAT, API,
and NR4A-based promoters are activated by anti-CD3 stimulation
with minimal background. (a) Vector and experimental schematics. Response
elements encoding NFAT, API, and NR4A-binding sites were cloned with
either a core promoter from the adenovirus-derived major late promoter
(MLP) or a synthetic minimal promoter (SMP). The NR4A and API binding
motifs were spaced by three random nucleotides as described for the
original SPECS library design. Lentiviral vectors were transduced
to primary human T cells and treated with PBS or anti-CD3 clone OKT3.
(b) Reporter fluorescence among transduced (CD271+) CD8+ or CD4+ cells
were measured after 24 h. (c) Representative flow plots gated on CD271+
CD8+ T cells are shown. Lines and error bars denote mean ± standard
deviation. ns—not significant, *P < 0.05
by two-way ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukey’s
test. n = 4 from two independent donors tested in
two technical replicates.
NFAT, API,
and NR4A-based promoters are activated by anti-CD3 stimulation
with minimal background. (a) Vector and experimental schematics. Response
elements encoding NFAT, API, and NR4A-binding sites were cloned with
either a core promoter from the adenovirus-derived major late promoter
(MLP) or a synthetic minimal promoter (SMP). The NR4A and API binding
motifs were spaced by three random nucleotides as described for the
original SPECS library design. Lentiviral vectors were transduced
to primary human T cells and treated with PBS or anti-CD3 clone OKT3.
(b) Reporter fluorescence among transduced (CD271+) CD8+ or CD4+ cells
were measured after 24 h. (c) Representative flow plots gated on CD271+
CD8+ T cells are shown. Lines and error bars denote mean ± standard
deviation. ns—not significant, *P < 0.05
by two-way ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukey’s
test. n = 4 from two independent donors tested in
two technical replicates.To investigate whether TCR-inducible promoters could be activated
by non-CD3-dependent mechanisms, we cultured promoter-transduced cells
in conditioned media derived from strongly activated T cells to mimic
an inflammatory milieu (Figure a). The NFAT, AP1, and NR4A promoters were significantly activated,
albeit at similarly low levels (∼10%) when the transduced cells
were cultured in the conditioned media compared to normal media (Figure b,c). Reporter activity
induced by the conditioned media was substantially lower than CD3-induced
responses. Thus, we have identified a novel NR4A-based promoter with
anti-CD3 inducible activity and a single lentiviral vector system
that permits stringent conditional gene expression alongside constitutive
gene expression.
Figure 2
TCR-inducible promoters are weakly activated by an inflammatory
milieu. (a) Experimental design. (i) Conditioned media was generated
by collecting the supernatant from expanded primary human T cells
restimulated with plate-bound anti-CD3/CD28 monoclonal antibodies.
(ii) Promoter or control-transduced T cells were cultured with normal
media, conditioned media, or plate-bound OKT3. (b) Representative
flow plots gated on CD271+ CD8+ cells are shown. (c) Quantification
of data shown in panel (b). Lines and error bars denote mean ±
standard deviation. ****P < 0.0001 by two-way
ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukey’s test. n = 4 from two independent donors tested in two technical
replicates.
TCR-inducible promoters are weakly activated by an inflammatory
milieu. (a) Experimental design. (i) Conditioned media was generated
by collecting the supernatant from expanded primary human T cells
restimulated with plate-bound anti-CD3/CD28 monoclonal antibodies.
(ii) Promoter or control-transduced T cells were cultured with normal
media, conditioned media, or plate-bound OKT3. (b) Representative
flow plots gated on CD271+ CD8+ cells are shown. (c) Quantification
of data shown in panel (b). Lines and error bars denote mean ±
standard deviation. ****P < 0.0001 by two-way
ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukey’s test. n = 4 from two independent donors tested in two technical
replicates.
Inducible Promoters Demonstrate
Reversible and Repeatable Activation
We next investigated
the activity of the inducible promoters after
the withdrawal of antigen receptor stimulation. Using the vectors
shown in Figure a,
we observed that it took up to 5 days after removing the source of
stimulation for the mKate fluorescence to dissipate (Figure S2b), suggesting high stability of the fluorescent
protein. To measure the reversibility and repeatability of inducible
promoter activation, we changed the reporter to a destabilized enhanced
yellow fluorescent protein (dEYFP) encoding an additional PEST motif,
which reduces the half-life of fluorescent proteins.[45] In this system, the reporter fluorescence is more closely
coupled to promoter activity. After transducing dEYFP vectors in human
T cells, we stimulated the cells for 1 day with OKT3 as above and
then transferred the cells to a fresh well without the agonist for
3 days of rest. This process was repeated three times (Figure a). The EFS-tCD271 vector served
as a negative control for normalization, where the YFP mean fluorescence
intensity (MFI) of cells transduced with each synthetic promoter vector
was divided by that of the negative control vector (Figure S4a). Across three sequential stimulations, the NFAT,
AP1, and NR4A promoter activities consistently returned to baseline
after 3 days of rest in CD8 T cells. In fact, the fluorescence intensity
for all reporters was reduced by at least 50% after only 1 day (Figure b–d).
Figure 3
Inducible promoter
responses are reversible and repeatable. (a)
Vector and experimental schematics. Response elements encoding NFAT,
API, and NR4A-binding sites with the synthetic minimal promoter (SMP)
were used to drive destabilized yellow fluorescence protein (dEYFP).
Lentiviral vectors were transduced to primary human T cells and treated
with PBS or anti-CD3 clone OKT3 for 24 h and then transferred to a
fresh plate for rest up to 3 days before repeating the process two
more times. (b–d) Reporter fluorescence among CD271+ CD8+ cells
were measured after 24 h of stimulation, then after 24 and 72 h of
rest, following the first (b), second (c), and third (d) round. Fluorescence
intensity was normalized to that of control vector transductants (see Figure S4a). Representative histograms gated
on CD271+ CD8+ T cells are shown. Lines and error bars denote mean
± standard deviation. ****P < 0.0001 by two-way
ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukey’s test. n = 4 from two independent donors tested in two technical
replicates.
Inducible promoter
responses are reversible and repeatable. (a)
Vector and experimental schematics. Response elements encoding NFAT,
API, and NR4A-binding sites with the synthetic minimal promoter (SMP)
were used to drive destabilized yellow fluorescence protein (dEYFP).
Lentiviral vectors were transduced to primary human T cells and treated
with PBS or anti-CD3 clone OKT3 for 24 h and then transferred to a
fresh plate for rest up to 3 days before repeating the process two
more times. (b–d) Reporter fluorescence among CD271+ CD8+ cells
were measured after 24 h of stimulation, then after 24 and 72 h of
rest, following the first (b), second (c), and third (d) round. Fluorescence
intensity was normalized to that of control vector transductants (see Figure S4a). Representative histograms gated
on CD271+ CD8+ T cells are shown. Lines and error bars denote mean
± standard deviation. ****P < 0.0001 by two-way
ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukey’s test. n = 4 from two independent donors tested in two technical
replicates.Interestingly, normalized responses
were moderately higher after
the second stimulation (Figures b,c and S5a), akin to a
recall response in adaptive lymphocytes. The lower responses observed
after the third stimulation (Figures d and S5a) were likely the
result of activation-induced cell death (Figure S4c). Reversible responses were also observed in CD4 T cells
with at least one round of stimulation (Figure S5b). Repeated OKT3 stimulation biased the outgrowth of CD4–
cells and decreased the overall viability of most samples (Figure S5c); thus, the promoter responses in
the CD4 subset after multiple rounds of activation could not be reliably
measured. Throughout the course of the experiment, the proportion
of CD271+ cells did not change significantly (Figure S5d), indicating that repeated activation of the promoters
was well tolerated and did not cause a growth disadvantage.
NR4A Promoter
Induces Higher Responses than NFAT and AP1 in
Weakly Immunogenic, Therapeutically Relevant Models
Although
OKT3 is a potent activator of T cells, it is not representative of
therapeutically relevant receptor–antigen interactions. To
characterize inducible promoter responses in more appropriate models,
we first selected a CAR based on the humanized single-chain variable
fragment (scFv) M5, targeting the widely expressed mesothelin tumor
antigen.[46] The M5 CAR, which encodes 41BB
and CD3z signaling domains (M5-BBz), is currently being tested in
clinical trials for treating a variety of solid tumors (NCT03054298,
NCT03323944). Mesothelin-targeting CAR-T strategies have yet to yield
consistent objective responses[47] and, therefore,
could benefit from the addition of inducible payloads. To investigate
the inducible promoter activity in a CAR setting, the M5-BBz CAR and
tCD271, separated by a porcine 2A (P2A) sequence, were encoded downstream
of the EFS promoter for constitutive expression. In these constructs,
inducible promoters that drive the expression of mKate as a reporter
were cloned upstream of the CAR. tCD271 with the receptor alone served
as a control vector (Figure a). T cells were transduced with the vectors and stimulated
with HEK293T (no mesothelin), A549 (low mesothelin), or OVCAR8 (high
mesothelin) target cells[48,49] (Figure a).
Figure 4
NR4A-based promoter responds better than NFAT
or API in weakly
stimulatory TCR/CAR-T models. (a, c, e) Schematics for CAR or TCR
and inducible module encoded within a single vector. (b, d, f) Primary
human T cells transduced with the vectors shown on the left of the
respective graph were cocultured with the indicated target cells,
and mKate fluorescence was measured after 24 h on CD271+ CD8+ or CD4+
subsets. (g) CD137 expression on CD271+ CD8+ T cells from the same
experiments shown in panels (b, d, f). Lines and error bars denote
mean ± standard deviation. *P < 0.05 and
****P < 0.0001 by two-way ANOVA adjusted for all
possible comparisons using Tukey’s test. n = 4 from two independent donors tested in two technical replicates.
Figure 5
NR4A-based promoter induces higher or comparable responses
to NFAT
in a target cell-dependent manner. (a) Surface mesothelin (MSLN) expression
on the indicated target cells lines. A549 was transduced via lentivirus
with full-length human MSLN expressed under the EFS promoter to generate
A549/MSLN. Gray solid and black lines indicate control and antigen-specific
staining, respectively. (b) Primary human T cells transduced with
the vectors shown in Figure a were cocultured with the targets in a percent of mKate (top)
and CD137 (bottom) expression was measured after 24 h on CD271+ CD8+
or CD4+ subsets. (c) MSLN staining of 293T and 293T expressing low
(L) or high (H) levels of MSLN. 293T was transduced with MSLN by lentivirus
and sorted by flow cytometry to generate low- and high-antigen target
cells. (d, e) CAR-T cells as described in (b) were cocultured with
the indicated 293T target cells. CD137 and mKate expression on CD271+
CD8+ or CD4+ subsets were measured after 24 h after coculture with
293T/MSLN-L (d) or 293T/MSLN-H (e) targets. Lines and error bars denote
mean ± standard deviation. ns—not significant, *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, and ****P < 0.0001 by
two-way ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukey’s
test. n = 6 from two independent donors tested in
three technical replicates.
NR4A-based promoter responds better than NFAT
or API in weakly
stimulatory TCR/CAR-T models. (a, c, e) Schematics for CAR or TCR
and inducible module encoded within a single vector. (b, d, f) Primary
human T cells transduced with the vectors shown on the left of the
respective graph were cocultured with the indicated target cells,
and mKate fluorescence was measured after 24 h on CD271+ CD8+ or CD4+
subsets. (g) CD137 expression on CD271+ CD8+ T cells from the same
experiments shown in panels (b, d, f). Lines and error bars denote
mean ± standard deviation. *P < 0.05 and
****P < 0.0001 by two-way ANOVA adjusted for all
possible comparisons using Tukey’s test. n = 4 from two independent donors tested in two technical replicates.NR4A-based promoter induces higher or comparable responses
to NFAT
in a target cell-dependent manner. (a) Surface mesothelin (MSLN) expression
on the indicated target cells lines. A549 was transduced via lentivirus
with full-length human MSLN expressed under the EFS promoter to generate
A549/MSLN. Gray solid and black lines indicate control and antigen-specific
staining, respectively. (b) Primary human T cells transduced with
the vectors shown in Figure a were cocultured with the targets in a percent of mKate (top)
and CD137 (bottom) expression was measured after 24 h on CD271+ CD8+
or CD4+ subsets. (c) MSLN staining of 293T and 293T expressing low
(L) or high (H) levels of MSLN. 293T was transduced with MSLN by lentivirus
and sorted by flow cytometry to generate low- and high-antigen target
cells. (d, e) CAR-T cells as described in (b) were cocultured with
the indicated 293T target cells. CD137 and mKate expression on CD271+
CD8+ or CD4+ subsets were measured after 24 h after coculture with
293T/MSLN-L (d) or 293T/MSLN-H (e) targets. Lines and error bars denote
mean ± standard deviation. ns—not significant, *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, and ****P < 0.0001 by
two-way ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukey’s
test. n = 6 from two independent donors tested in
three technical replicates.Among the transduced CD8 and CD4 T cells, we observed no mKate
fluorescence when effector cells were cultured with HEK293T, again
demonstrating minimal antigen-independent promoter activity (Figure b). With the strong
OVCAR8 stimulation, similar levels of reporter expression were observed.
Notably, the NR4A promoter induced significantly more mKate expression
than the NFAT and AP1 promoters when cultured with weakly stimulatory
A549 targets (Figures b, S6a, and S7a). OVCAR8 cells were indeed
more immunogenic than A549 cells in the M5 model based on CD137 upregulation
(Figures g and S6a). A similar trend was observed when the promoters
were tested with a CD28-based M5 CAR (M5-28z, Figure c): the NR4A promoter responded at higher
levels than the standard NFAT in response to A549 stimulation (Figures d and S6a). In the M5-28z model, AP1 demonstrated higher
activity than NR4A in response to OVCAR8 cells (Figures d and S7b). Inducible
promoter vectors for both CARs were transduced at ∼50–70%
efficiency (Figure S6b), with comparable
CD271 expression levels between the NR4A and NFAT promoter vectors
(Figure S6c).Next, we constructed
a similar set of vectors using the affinity-matured
HLA-A2/NYESO1-specific 1G4 TCR[50] as the
model antigen receptor. 1G4 TCR has demonstrated clinical efficacy
in treating melanoma and synovial sarcoma.[51,52] The two P2A sequences between tCD271, TCRα, and TCRβ
genes were codon-modified to avoid repetition in the viral genome
(Figure e). TCR-T
cells were stimulated with HEK293T or A375 cells. Both of these cell
lines express HLA-A2, but only A375 expresses the cognate antigen.[50,53] In the TCR model, NR4A also responded with consistently higher reporter
positivity than NFAT or AP1 after coculture with A375, although the
overall responses were lower than those seen with the CAR models.
The promoters induced higher responses in CD8 T cells than in CD4
cells (Figures f and S7c), which was expected since the 1G4 TCR is
HLA class I restricted. The lower levels of CD137 upregulation in
the TCR model were consistent with the weaker promoter activity (Figure g), which may have
been caused by the insufficient formation of the correct TCRα/β
pairing. A stronger constitutive promoter may be needed to practically
implement this system with recombinant TCRs, which must be expressed
at high levels to compete with endogenous TCR hemichains in forming
antigen-specific surface receptors. The TCR constructs were ∼400
bp larger than the CAR vectors and were transduced less efficiently
(Figure S6b). Nevertheless, across all
of the receptor models tested in our study, we observed significantly
higher responses with the NR4A-based promoter compared to the responses
observed with the standard NFAT promoter under poorly stimulatory
conditions—precisely the context where payload expression is
needed.
Characterizing Mesothelin-Induced Promoter Responses in M5-BBz
CAR-T Cells
To evaluate the antigen-induced promoter responses
in more detail, we further characterized the antigen-inducible promoters
using the M5-BBz CAR with additional target cells expressing various
levels of mesothelin. First, we overexpressed mesothelin on A549 cells
to generate A549/MSLN cells with high levels of surface antigen (Figure a). When M5-BBz CAR-T
cells encoding the NFAT, AP1, or NR4A-mKate reporter constructs (Figure a) were stimulated
with A549, OVCAR8, or A549/MSLN cells, or with 293T cells as a control,
the NR4A-based promoter induced higher and comparable reporter expression
in response to A549 and OVCAR8, respectively, versus the NFAT and
AP1 promoters, as observed in Figure b. When stimulated with A549/MSLN targets with high-antigen
expression, the NR4A promoter also induced higher responses than other
promoters (Figures b and S8), suggesting that the NR4A promoter
may be more active than NFAT in some highly stimulatory contexts as
well. A549/MSLN stimulation indeed activated more CAR-T responders
than A549 based on CD137 upregulation (Figure b).We then generated 293T cells expressing
low (L) or high (H) levels of mesothelin to investigate the effect
of antigen density on an independent target cell line. Parental 293T
cells without mesothelin expression were transduced with the antigen
and sorted by flow cytometry to generate 293T/MSLN-L and 293T/MSLN-H
targets that resemble A549 and A549/MSLN, respectively (Figure c). The NR4A-based promoter
induced significantly higher reporter expression when CAR-T cells
were stimulated with 293T/MSLN-L cells compared to NFAT and AP1 promoters
(Figures d and S8), although the differences were less pronounced
than those seen with A549-induced responses (Figure b). Stimulation with 293T/MSLN-H cells also
elicited significantly higher responses from the NR4A promoter in
CD8+ CAR-T cells (Figure e). Collectively, these data demonstrate that the NR4A-based
promoter consistently outperforms the conventional NFAT promoter not
only under weakly stimulatory conditions but also in certain high-antigen
settings in a target cell-dependent manner, where target cell-specific
factors may contribute to differential activation of the promoters.
Recombinant Cytokines Expressed under the NR4A Promoter Amplify
Weak Antitumor Proliferative Responses
As a proof-of-concept,
we generated inducible constructs to conditionally express IL-2 and
IL-21 in the clinically relevant M5-BBz model. The mKate reporter
gene of M5-BBz CAR vectors (Figure a) was replaced with recombinant IL-2 and IL-21, separated
by a P2A sequence (Figure a). Constitutive expression of either cytokine alone has been
reported to enhance the proliferation of CD19 CAR-T cells.[10] Although both of these common γ chain
cytokines can be produced endogenously by activated human T cells,
cytokine production is poor when the cells are suboptimally stimulated.[54] Therefore, we reasoned that the NR4A-based synthetic
promoter system could supplement these beneficial cytokines under
conditions that preclude endogenous production.
Figure 6
Cytokines delivered under
the NR4A-based promoter amplify weak
proliferative responses in CAR-T cells. (a) Schematics for vectors
encoding M5-BBz CAR with or without IL-2 and IL-21 as inducible payloads.
(b) Primary human T cells transduced with the vectors shown in (a)
were labeled with CFSE and cocultured with the indicated target cells.
Dye dilution was measured after 4 days of coculture. Representative
histograms gated on CD271+ CD8+ T cells are shown. (c) Quantification
of CFSE dilution among CD271+ CD8+ or CD4+ subsets. n = 4 from two independent donors tested in two technical replicates.
(d) Schematics for vectors encoding IL-2 and IL-21 as inducible payloads
or mKate as a control. (e) Experiment was performed as described in
(b). Representative histograms gated on CD271+ CD8+ T cells are shown.
(f) Quantification of CFSE dilution among CD271+ CD8+ or CD4+ subsets. n = 10 from three independent donors, with two donors tested
in four technical replicates and one donor tested in two technical
implicates. Lines and error bars denote mean ± standard deviation,
ns—not significant, *P < 0.05, ***P < 0.001, and ****P < 0.0001 by
two-way ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukey’s
test.
Cytokines delivered under
the NR4A-based promoter amplify weak
proliferative responses in CAR-T cells. (a) Schematics for vectors
encoding M5-BBz CAR with or without IL-2 and IL-21 as inducible payloads.
(b) Primary human T cells transduced with the vectors shown in (a)
were labeled with CFSE and cocultured with the indicated target cells.
Dye dilution was measured after 4 days of coculture. Representative
histograms gated on CD271+ CD8+ T cells are shown. (c) Quantification
of CFSE dilution among CD271+ CD8+ or CD4+ subsets. n = 4 from two independent donors tested in two technical replicates.
(d) Schematics for vectors encoding IL-2 and IL-21 as inducible payloads
or mKate as a control. (e) Experiment was performed as described in
(b). Representative histograms gated on CD271+ CD8+ T cells are shown.
(f) Quantification of CFSE dilution among CD271+ CD8+ or CD4+ subsets. n = 10 from three independent donors, with two donors tested
in four technical replicates and one donor tested in two technical
implicates. Lines and error bars denote mean ± standard deviation,
ns—not significant, *P < 0.05, ***P < 0.001, and ****P < 0.0001 by
two-way ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukey’s
test.In a proliferation assay without
cytokine supplementation in the
media, CAR-T cells transduced with the control M5-BBz or inducible
IL-2/IL-21 vectors demonstrated low levels of proliferation in the
absence of stimulation. In contrast, the majority of the cells were
divided after coculture with the immunogenic OVCAR8 cells with high-antigen
expression. When stimulated with weakly immunogenic A549 targets,
more of the NR4A-IL-2/IL-21 transductants proliferated compared to
cells engineered with other vectors. The improvement in proliferation
was more pronounced for the CD8 than CD4 subset (Figure b,c), consistent with a past
study showing that IL-2 improves the proliferation of suboptimally
stimulated CD8 but not of CD4 murine T cells.[55] Based on additional experiments in which the NR4A promoter induced
the expression either of cytokines or mKate as a control (Figure d), we determined
that the enhanced proliferation in response to A549 was payload-dependent
(Figure e,f). Transduction
efficiencies of inducible cytokine constructs were similar (Figures S9 and S10c).Consistent with these
data, more of the CAR-T cells encoding the
NR4A-IL-2/IL-21 module produced IL-2 when stimulated with A549, compared
to cells transduced with other inducible modules or the control vector
(Figure S10a,b). Moreover, in A549 cocultures,
the proliferation of NFAT-IL-2/IL-21 CAR-T cells was not increased
compared to control CAR-T cells (Figure c,f), in line with the low responses observed
with the NFAT promoter in Figure b. Across these experiments, inducible expression of
the cytokines did not significantly enhance proliferation compared
to CAR alone when cells were cultured with OVCAR8 cells (Figure c,f). In summary,
these data demonstrate a proof-of-concept that payloads delivered
via the NR4A promoter system can augment suboptimal CAR-T responses.
Increasing the Number of TF Binding Sites Modestly Improves
Activity of NR4A Based but Not NFAT-Based Promoter
Finally,
we investigated the effect of TF binding site multiplicity on the
responsiveness of the novel NR4A promoter and the conventional NFAT
promoter, using the inducible mKate reporter within the M5-BBz mesothelin
CAR-T model. We generated additional NFAT-based promoters with six
and eight motif copies and NR4A-based promoters with 4, 12, and 16
motif copies. Due to the compactness of the NR4A motif, more binding
sites could be tested compared to NFAT; the NR4Ax16 response element
was comparable in length to the NFATx6 (Figure a and Table S2).
Figure 7
Increasing transcription factor binding sites modestly improves
the activity of the NR4A-based but not NFAT-based promoter. (a) Schematics
for M5-BBz CAR vectors encoding various copies of NFAT or NR4A-binding
sites. Attempts to clone eight direct copies of the NFAT motif were
unsuccessful. Thus, NFATx8 was generated with a 14 bp spacer between
two parental NFAT response elements of four motifs each (120 + 120
+ 14 = 254 bp). Full sequences are shown in Supporting Information Tables. Primary human T cells transduced with the
vectors shown in (a) were cocultured with the indicated target cells.
Percent of mKate positivity (b), mKate MFI (c), and percent of CD137
positivity (d) on CD271+ CD8+ or CD4+ subsets were quantified. n = 8 from two independent donors tested in four technical
replicates. Lines and error bars denote mean ± standard deviation.
ns—not significant, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, and ****P < 0.0001 by
two-way ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukeyʼs
test.
Increasing transcription factor binding sites modestly improves
the activity of the NR4A-based but not NFAT-based promoter. (a) Schematics
for M5-BBz CAR vectors encoding various copies of NFAT or NR4A-binding
sites. Attempts to clone eight direct copies of the NFAT motif were
unsuccessful. Thus, NFATx8 was generated with a 14 bp spacer between
two parental NFAT response elements of four motifs each (120 + 120
+ 14 = 254 bp). Full sequences are shown in Supporting Information Tables. Primary human T cells transduced with the
vectors shown in (a) were cocultured with the indicated target cells.
Percent of mKate positivity (b), mKate MFI (c), and percent of CD137
positivity (d) on CD271+ CD8+ or CD4+ subsets were quantified. n = 8 from two independent donors tested in four technical
replicates. Lines and error bars denote mean ± standard deviation.
ns—not significant, **P < 0.01, ***P < 0.001, and ****P < 0.0001 by
two-way ANOVA adjusted for all possible comparisons using Tukeyʼs
test.Increasing the number of NFAT
binding motifs from four to eight
copies did not augment promoter responses when CAR-T cells were cocultured
with A549 cells (Figure b,c). For NR4A-based promoters, whereas additional binding sites
did not increase the proportion of cells responding after stimulation
(Figure b), the mean
intensity of reporter fluorescence was modestly higher with 16 versus
8 copies of the NR4A-binding motif when transductants were stimulated
with the low antigen A549 targets (Figure c). Conversely, reducing NR4A-binding sites
from eight to four copies significantly diminished responses when
CAR-T cells were stimulated with either A549 or OVCAR8 targets (Figure b). Encoding promoters
with varying numbers of NFAT or NR4A-binding sites had no effect on
CAR-T activation as measured by CD137 upregulation (Figure c). These data indicate that
the NFAT promoter activity in our system cannot be improved by increasing
the number of TF binding sites, and the parental NFAT and NR4A promoters
encoding four and eight binding sites, respectively, are likely sufficient
for near-maximal responses.
Conclusions
In
this study, we identified a novel antigen-inducible transcriptional
response element in human T cells based on a TF binding site of the
NR4A family. Notably, the NR4A-based promoter outperformed the conventional
NFAT-based promoter under poorly stimulatory conditions. TCR-induced
activation of the NR4A pathway has been characterized previously.[37,56,57] This pathway has been used to
monitor TCR signaling by knocking-in a reporter at the NR4A1 (Nur77)
locus.[57−59] In theory, payload transgenes could also be knocked-in
at the NR4A1 site to achieve inducible expression, and improvements
in site-specific integration technologies for primary lymphocytes[60−62] will facilitate the practical implementation of this approach. With
the knock-in method, however, transcriptional output will be dictated
by endogenous elements, which lacks the flexibility afforded by a
synthetic promoter system that can be tuned for a variety of applications.Our promoter platform similarly leverages the NR4A pathway; instead
of relying on endogenous response elements to drive NR4A1 transcription,
a short sequence encoding an NR4A-binding motif is used to drive conditional
gene expression. The NR4A family consists of three members: NR4A1/Nur77,
NR4A2/Nurr1, and NR4A3/Nor1, all of which bind to the same consensus
DNA motif.[63] Thus, all three members are
likely to be involved in regulating our synthetic promoter. In human
T cells, NR4A1 expression is dependent on phosphoinositide 3-kinase
and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways of antigen receptor
signaling but is largely independent of NFAT.[56] In murine T cells, NR4A1 is similarly regulated as in humans, whereas
NR4A2 and NR4A3 require both NFAT and MAPK pathways for full induction.[64]Efforts to develop alternatives to NFAT-based
antigen-inducible
promoters have also been reported by other groups. Recently, Webster
et al.[65] described an antigen-inducible
promoter encoding both AP1 and NFKB motifs with low basal activity.
Placing a CAR and other payloads under the AP1-NFKB promoter led to
the self-amplifying expression of the transgenes in an antigen-dependent
manner.[65] Wei and Jensen assembled a library
of promoters composed of binding sites targeted by TFs upregulated
in antigen-activated T cells (WO2018/213332). Screening the library
in T cells identified promoters with greater inducible activity than
the conventional NFAT in a CD19 CAR-T model. Notably, neither study
tested the NR4A motif described here. Whether the sensitivity of these
antigen-inducible promoters can be improved by incorporating the NR4A
motif warrants investigation.Activation at a lower immunogenic
threshold is a critical feature
of the NR4A antigen-inducible promoter that could widen the therapeutic
index for a variety of molecular therapeutics compared to systemic
or constitutive delivery. Our findings could also guide the design
of subsequent antigen-inducible promoters with even greater sensitivity
and robustness, to enable applications such as site-specific production
of: bispecific engagers to trigger bystander lymphocyte responses;
chemokines to promote infiltration of immune effectors; or cell-intrinsic
regulators to conditionally reprogram engineered cells in an autonomous
manner. These and other applications can be explored in future preclinical
studies. In conclusion, the outcomes of this study could potentially
empower a wide range of synthetic biology approaches to overcome current
challenges in adoptive cell immunotherapies.
Material and Methods
Cell Culture
HEK293T, A375, A549, and Jurkat.E6 cell
lines were obtained from the American Type Culture Collection (ATCC,
Manassas, VA). OVCAR8 was a gift from Dr. Sangeeta N. Bhatia (Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA). HEK293T, A375, A549, and
OVCAR8 cell lines were cultured in DMEM (Thermo Fisher Scientific,
Waltham, MA; catalog #10569010). Primary human T cells and the Jurkat.E6
cell line were cultured in RPMI-1640 (Thermo Fisher Scientific; catalog
#11875119). All media were supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum
(Corning; catalog #35-010-CV) and 1% penicillin/streptomycin (Thermo
Fisher Scientific; catalog #15140122).
Generation of Lentiviral
Vectors
Truncated CD271 (tCD271)-CAR
or TCR, EYFP destabilized with a PEST motif (dEYFP), full-length human
mesothelin (MSLN, UniProt: Q13421-1), and IL-2/IL-21 fragments were
synthesized as gBlocks by Integrated DNA Technologies (Coralville,
IA). The M5 scFv sequence was derived from the patent WO2015/090230.
Sequences of 28z and BBz signaling domains and the affinity-matured
1G4 TCR were as previously described.[50,66] Except NFAT,
all TF binding sites and mKate sequences were derived from SPECS plasmids
(Addgene #127842). The NFAT response element, containing four binding
motifs, was subcloned from the pSIRV-NFAT-eGFP plasmid[67] (a gift from Peter Steinberger, Addgene plasmid
#118031). Two copies of the NFAT sequence were combined with an intervening
restriction site to generate the NFATx8 response element. NFATx6,
NR4Ax4, NR4Ax12, and NR4Ax16 were synthesized as oligos by IDT. The
EYFP sequence was derived from Addgene plasmid #51791, and the PEST
sequence was derived from Addgene plasmid #69072. The EFS promoter
was subcloned from the lentiCRISPRv2 plasmid (a gift from Feng Zhang,
Addgene plasmid #52961). The EFS promoter and tCD271-CAR/TCR fragments
were first assembled into a lentiviral backbone vector (derived from
pFUGW in-house) in the reverse orientation of the long-terminal repeats.
Inducible promoter and reporter or payload genes were then inserted
upstream of the EFS promoter. Inserted sequences were confirmed by
Sanger sequencing (GENEWIZ, South Plainfield, NJ). Vector component
sequences can be found in Table S2. Each
set of NFAT, AP1, or NR4A vectors only differed at the TF binding
sequence.
Lentivirus Production
Lentivirus was generated by transfecting
HEK293T cells of less than 10 passages and grown to ∼80% confluency
in T25 flasks, with 1.5 μg of pMD2.G (a gift from Didier Trono,
Addgene plasmid #12259), 3.5 μg of psPAX2 (a gift from Didier
Trono, Addgene plasmid #12260), and 5 μg of respective transfer
plasmid using the TransIT-2020 reagent (MirusBio, Japan). Media was
changed to fresh complete DMEM 16–24 h post transfection, and
lentivirus was collected after another 24 h to be used immediately
or stored at −80 °C. The virus was titered by infecting
Jurkat.E6 at limiting dilutions.
Lentiviral Transduction
of Primary Human T Cells
Peripheral
blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were isolated by density gradient
centrifugation from apheresis products of healthy donors (Brigham
and Women’s Hospital Crimson Core, Boston, MA). Primary human
T cells were purified from PBMCs by Pan T Cell Isolation Kit (Miltenyi
Biotec, Germany). Purified T cells were stimulated with anti-CD3/CD28
Dynabeads (Thermo Fisher Scientific) at a T cell/bead ratio of 1:2.
After 24 h, Dynabeads were removed and stimulated T cells were seeded
on a Retronectin (Takara Bio, Japan)-coated nontissue culture-treated
plate with virus and centrifuged at 1200g, 32 °C
for 30 min. One-time infection was carried out for the smaller vectors
shown in Figures and 2 at a multiplicity of infection (MOI) of 5–10.
Larger vectors shown in Figures and 4 were infected at a MOI
of 10–20, spread out over 2 days of daily infection. During
stimulation and infection, T cells were supplemented daily with 100
U/mL of IL-2 and 10 ng/mL of IL-15 (NCI Preclinical Repository, Frederick,
MD). After infection, T cells were maintained by supplementing with
100 U/mL of IL-2 and 10 ng/mL of IL-15 every 3 days. T cells were
expanded for another 5–6 days after the last infection prior
to use in experiments.
Flow Cytometry
The following monoclonal
antibodies
(BioLegend, San Diego, CA) were used in this study: antihuman CD3
(clone UCHT1), antihuman CD4 (clone RPA-T4), antihuman CD8 (clone
RPA-T8), antihuman CD271 (clone ME20.4), antihuman mesothelin (clone
MN), polyclonal goat antimouse IgG, antihuman CD69 (clone FN50), antihuman
CD137 (clone 4B4-1), and antihuman IL-2 (clone MQ1-17H12). Surface
staining of T cells was carried out at 4 °C for 15 min with a
master mix of antibodies. Target cells were stained with antimesothelin
mAb, then washed and stained with polyclonal antimouse IgG antibodies,
or with antimouse IgG alone as a control staining. For intracellular
staining of IL-2, cells were fixed and permeabilized after surface
staining using the Cytofix/Cytoperm kit (BD Biosciences). Stained
cells were analyzed with a FACSCantoII, FACSCelesta, or LSRFortessa
flow cytometer (BD Biosciences). Data analysis was performed with
FlowJo. All data shown were gated on singlets and live cells, determined
by Aqua fixable dye (Thermo Fisher Scientific) for mKate-expressing
and intracellular experiments or 7-aminoactinomycin D (BioLegend)
for all other experiments.
T Cell Stimulation Assays
For plate-bound
stimulations,
nontissue culture-treated plates were coated with 2 μg/mL anti-CD3
clone OKT3 (NCI preclinical repository) with or without 2 μg/mL
anti-CD28 clone CD28.2 (BioLegend) by incubating at 4 °C overnight.
The same volume of PBS (Thermo Fisher Scientific) was used as a control
treatment. Antibody or PBS solution was removed, and T cells were
seeded to the treated wells and cultured for 24 h. Cells were analyzed
post stimulation or transferred to fresh tissue-culture-treated wells
to rest. For cell-based coculture stimulations, T cells were mixed
with HEK293T, A375, A549, or OVCAR8 targets at an effector/target
(ET) ratio of 3:1 and cultured for 24 h to measure reporter fluorescence.
For intracellular IL-2 detection, CAR-T cells were cultured with targets
at a 3:1 ET ratio for 18 h, followed by treatment with 1500×
diluted monesin (BD Biosciences) for 6 h. To measure proliferation,
T cells were washed with PBS and labeled with 1 μM of carboxyfluorescein
succinimidyl ester (CFSE, Thermo Fisher Scientific) by incubating
them at 37 °C for 5 min. Labeled cells were washed with complete
media and cocultured with A549 or OVCAR8 target cells at an ET ratio
of 10:1. CFSE dilution was assessed after 4 days of coculture.
Statistics
Comparisons between more than two groups
were performed by two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Tukey’s
multiple comparisons test. Differences were considered significant
at an adjusted P-value of less than 0.05. All statistical
analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism 9. Error bars denote
one standard deviation.
Authors: Sabrina Jutz; Judith Leitner; Klaus Schmetterer; Iago Doel-Perez; Otto Majdic; Katharina Grabmeier-Pfistershammer; Wolfgang Paster; Johannes B Huppa; Peter Steinberger Journal: J Immunol Methods Date: 2016-01-15 Impact factor: 2.303
Authors: Paul F Robbins; Yong F Li; Mona El-Gamil; Yangbing Zhao; Jennifer A Wargo; Zhili Zheng; Hui Xu; Richard A Morgan; Steven A Feldman; Laura A Johnson; Alan D Bennett; Steven M Dunn; Tara M Mahon; Bent K Jakobsen; Steven A Rosenberg Journal: J Immunol Date: 2008-05-01 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: Xi-Zhi J Guo; Pradyot Dash; Matthew Calverley; Suzanne Tomchuck; Mari H Dallas; Paul G Thomas Journal: Mol Ther Methods Clin Dev Date: 2016-01-27 Impact factor: 6.698
Authors: Ming-Ru Wu; Lior Nissim; Doron Stupp; Erez Pery; Adina Binder-Nissim; Karen Weisinger; Casper Enghuus; Sebastian R Palacios; Melissa Humphrey; Zhizhuo Zhang; Eva Maria Novoa; Manolis Kellis; Ron Weiss; Samuel D Rabkin; Yuval Tabach; Timothy K Lu Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2019-06-28 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Jianbin Wang; Joshua J DeClercq; Samuel B Hayward; Patrick Wai-Lun Li; David A Shivak; Philip D Gregory; Gary Lee; Michael C Holmes Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2015-11-02 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Katharina Zimmermann; Johannes Kuehle; Anna Christina Dragon; Melanie Galla; Christina Kloth; Loreen Sophie Rudek; I Erol Sandalcioglu; Belal Neyazi; Thomas Moritz; Johann Meyer; Claudia Rossig; Bianca Altvater; Britta Eiz-Vesper; Michael Alexander Morgan; Hinrich Abken; Axel Schambach Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2020-02-06 Impact factor: 6.639