| Literature DB >> 35406613 |
Corinna Grunert1,2, Gerald Willimsky3,4,5, Caroline Anna Peuker1, Simone Rhein2, Leo Hansmann5,6, Thomas Blankenstein2,7, Eric Blanc8, Dieter Beule8, Ulrich Keller1,2,5, Antonio Pezzutto1,2, Antonia Busse1,2,5.
Abstract
(1) Background: Mutation-specific T cell receptor (TCR)-based adoptive T cell therapy represents a truly tumor-specific immunotherapeutic strategy. However, isolating neoepitope-specific TCRs remains a challenge. (2)Entities:
Keywords: T cell receptor (TCR) therapy; T cell receptor repertoire; antigen-specific T cell; neoantigens; tumor-specific TCR
Year: 2022 PMID: 35406613 PMCID: PMC8998067 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14071842
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cancers (Basel) ISSN: 2072-6694 Impact factor: 6.639
Summary of neoantigens selected for TMG-construction for patients BIH146 and BIH56. Mutated amino acids of the respective epitopes are indicated in red. HLA-binding predictions were performed with NetMHC4.0; threshold rank for strong binders was 0.5, and for weak binders it was 2.00.
| Patient | TMG Name | Epitope | Gene/ | HLA | % | IC50 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 146 | TMG146 | ILI | SLC35D1T324S | A2:01 | 0.12 | 9.76 |
| RLNG | CDH2D660Y | A2:01 | 0.6 | 44.92 | ||
| F | PIGMV62L | A2:01 | 0.12 | 10.64 | ||
| MLFTIGQS | TBC1D1E299K | A2:01 | 0.6 | 43.62 | ||
| SLFPEILL | ATP11CI1108R | A2:01 | 0.15 | 12.01 | ||
| FLGTSTLLV | MCOLN2W390S | A2:01 | 0.5 | 36.71 | ||
| CADPS2E695Q | A2:01 | 3.5 | 653.37 | |||
| 56 | TMG56 | SLC27A4R408H | A2:01 | 0.8 | 62.41 | |
| SP | PLCB3R918S | B7:02 | 0.25 | 50.2 | ||
| LAVD | NBPFM674T | B35:01 | 2.00 | 1356.1 | ||
| HSHELNGP | CRYBB2C38Y | B35:01 | 0.2 | 36.43 | ||
| WLDGKHV | PPIAL4GA128V | C4:01 | 0.03 | 1679.01 | ||
| TKFDV | INF2E670Q | C4:01 | 0.4 | 4893.37 | ||
| YRQ | IGSF9BE63Q | C7:02 | 0.01 | 48.03 | ||
| RRNP | PDXKA305T | C7:02 | 1.2 | 3589.15 | ||
| YRRDVH | KLHL22Q281H | C7:02 | 1.9 | 5719.99 |
Figure 1Stimulation and identification of patient- and donor-derived peptide-reactive T lymphocytes (CTLs). (A) Single-cell sequencing of TILs and PBMCs for patient BIH146. Pie charts show relative frequencies of detected TCRα/β sequences. The most frequent clone in TMG-stimulated TIL is indicated (16A4). Grey segments represent all TCRα/β rearrangements, which were detected only once per sample. (B) Peptide-expanded CTL lines were generated in a peptide stimulation containing all seven neoantigen candidates identified for patient BIH146. Each CTL line was screened for peptide recognition of individually loaded T2 cells, and T cell activation was measured by CD137 surface expression after 20 h. Representative results are shown for donor A-derived CTL lines, which were generated from naive-enriched (naiveCTL) and non-naive (nonCTL) CD8+ T cells. CD137 expression is depicted as a heatmap of the percentage of CD8+ cells. For each patient, five donors were stimulated twice. Max: maximal activation induced by PMA and Ionomycin activation. (C) CTL lines identified by screening assays were stimulated with their specific peptide. T2 cells were pulsed with peptide at 1 × 106 µg/mL and used as target cells in a degranulation assay for 4h in the presence of monensin. Degranulation marker CD107a-positive cells were sorted. Representative FACS plots show CTL lines, which were generated from stimulations of naive and non-naive CD8+ T cells (donor A, upper panel) with a peptide pool of all seven peptides for BIH146 and bulk CD8+ T cells stimulated with one neoantigen candidate for BIH56 (lower panel, donor F). To estimate background activation, T2 cells were loaded with an irrelevant peptide and DMSO control. A representative control is shown (first row). (D) Summary of degranulation assays of all identified CTLs of all reactive donors (n = 6 reactive donors). Alive, single, CD3+CD8+ cells were gated for CD107a expression. Dotted lines separate donors, and the dashed line separates stimulations for patients BIH146 and BIH56.
Figure 2TCR specificity and endogenous processing of predicted neoepitope candidates. (A) TCR-cassettes were expressed in different donor PBLs (minimum n = 2), and expression of engineered TCRs was measured by staining for mouse TCRß constant region (mTCRß). Transduction efficiencies varied between 20 and 85% of CD8+ T cells. (B) The HLA-A2+ target cell line U266 was loaded with neoepitope candidates at 1 × 10−6 M and incubated with TCR-transduced (td) PBLs. Peptide-recognition was measured by IFNγ-secretion after overnight incubation. Representative data from one donor are shown, and samples were analyzed in duplicates. (C) Decreasing concentrations of peptides from 1 × 10−5–1 × 10−12 M were loaded onto T2 cells and co-cultured with TCR-transduced (TCR-td) PBLs. IFNγ secretion was measured from culture supernatant. (D) Nucleofection of tandem minigenes (TMG) encoding for neoepitope candidates into U266 cells. Nucleofection efficiency was assessed by eGFP-expression by flow cytometry. The graph shows nucleofection efficiency for the U266 cell, which was used for co-culture with TCR-transduced PBLs shown in graph (E). (E) Recognition of TMG-expressing U266 cells by TCR-td PBLs. IFN-y secretion was detected by ELISA after overnight incubation. Representative data are shown for one donor, and experiments were carried out in duplicates and for at least two different donors. Irrelevant peptide: non-specific or wildtype peptide; max: T cell activation cocktail, and untr.: untransduced. The same-colored bars/lines indicate specificity for the same neoepitope candidate; red: CDH2D660Y, yellow: SLC35D1T324S; blue: SLC27A4R408H, and green: MCOLN2W390S.