| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Experimental Therapeutics |
1,3Galactosyltransferase1
Departments of Microbiology and Immunology [D. C. L., S. Y. Z., U. G.] and Dermatology [J. T. A.], MCP Hahnemann School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19129
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-galactosyl (
-gal) epitopes (i.e., Gal
1,3Galß1,4GlcNAc-R). Subsequent in situ binding of natural anti-Gal IgG molecules to these epitopes would result in the formation of immune complexes that target tumor vaccines for uptake by APCs, via the interaction of the Fc portion of anti-Gal with Fc
receptors on APCs. This hypothesis was tested in a unique experimental animal model of knockout mice for
1,3galactosyltransferase (
1,3GT) and the mouse melanoma B16-BL6 (referred to here as BL6). Like humans, these mice lack
-gal epitopes and produce anti-Gal. BL6 melanoma cells are highly tumorigenic, and like human tumor cells, they lack
-gal epitopes. Expression of
-gal epitopes on these melanoma cells was achieved by stable transfection with
1,3GT cDNA. The transfected melanoma cells (termed BL6
GT) express
2 x 106
-gal epitopes per cell and readily form immune complexes with anti-Gal.
Vaccination of the mice with 2 x 106 irradiated melanoma cells that express
-gal epitopes, followed by challenge with 0.5 x 106 live parental melanoma cells, resulted in protection for at least 2 months (i.e., no tumor growth) in one-third of the mice, whereas all mice immunized with irradiated parental melanoma cells developed tumors 2126 days post-challenge. The proportion of protected mice doubled when the mice were immunized twice with irradiated melanoma cells expressing
-gal epitopes and challenged with 0.2 x 106 live BL6 cells. Histological studies on the developing tumors in challenged mice that were immunized with melanoma cells expressing
-gal epitopes demonstrated extensive infiltration of T lymphocytes and macrophages, whereas no mononuclear cell infiltrates were observed in tumors of mice immunized with parental tumor cells.
Overall, these studies imply that immunization of
1,3GT knockout mice with BL6 melanoma cells that express
-gal epitopes elicits, in a proportion of the population, protective immune response against the same tumor lacking such epitopes. These studies further suggest that similar immunization of cancer patients with autologous tumor vaccines that are engineered to express
-gal epitopes may increase the immune response to autologous tumor-associated antigens and, thus, may elicit immune-mediated destruction of metastatic cells expressing these antigens.
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Developing methods for increasing the uptake of tumor vaccines by APCs is of particular significance when autologous tumor cells are to be used as vaccines. Many human TAA molecules that may serve as vaccines have not been identified or isolated. Moreover, the combination of the various TAAs varies in different tumors of the same type (7, 8, 9) . Therefore, autologous tumor cells have been considered as potentially one of the best sources for vaccines directed against the metastasizing tumors (8) . These considerations have been supported by studies showing that dendritic cells pulsed with acid-eluted autologous TAA peptides served as a vaccine that effectively protected against challenge with live tumor cells (10 , 11) . Similarly, autologous dendritic cells transfected with tumor mRNA served as effective vaccines (12) . The use of such vaccines requires the in vitro growth of autologous dendritic cells for the subsequent pulsing or transfection. We have developed a simple alternative method for targeting autologous tumor vaccines to APCs in vivo by the in situ complexing of tumor vaccines with the natural anti-Gal antibody (13 , 14) .
Previous studies have shown that immunogenicity of bacterial and viral vaccines could be increased by the formation of immune complexes with IgG antibodies that target the vaccine to APCs. The Fc portion of the complexed IgG binds to Fc
receptors on APCs and induces effective uptake of the vaccine by the APCs (15, 16, 17, 18, 19)
. On the basis of this principle, we have proposed that human autologous and allogeneic tumor vaccines may effectively be targeted to APCs by the in situ formation of immune complexes with the natural anti-Gal antibody (13
, 14) . This antibody, which constitutes 1% of circulating IgG in humans (20)
, interacts specifically with the carbohydrate epitope Gal
1,3Galß1,4GlcNAc-R (termed the
-gal epitope; Refs. 21
and 22
). The
-gal epitope is produced in large amounts on cells of nonprimate mammals and New World monkeys (monkeys of South America) by the glycosylation enzyme
1,3GT (23
, 24)
. This epitope is completely absent in humans, apes, and Old World monkeys (monkeys of Asia and Africa) because these species lack
1,3GT (23
, 24)
.
In vivo binding of anti-Gal to
-gal epitopes on xenografts, such as pig organs, induces their rejection in humans and monkeys (25, 26, 27)
. Similarly, in vivo binding of anti-Gal to
-gal epitopes on envelope glycoproteins of retroviral vectors used for gene therapy induces their destruction (28, 29, 30)
. This immunological potential of anti-Gal can be exploited for the in situ formation of immune complexes with autologous tumor vaccines engineered to express
-gal epitopes. We have previously shown that binding of anti-Gal to human tumor cells engineered to express these epitopes, indeed, resulted in excessive uptake of the cells by macrophages (13
, 14)
.
Until recently, the efficacy of tumor vaccines expressing
-gal epitopes could not be tested in an experimental small animal model because mice or rats synthesize
-gal epitopes, thus they do not produce anti-Gal. In contrast, Old World monkeys as rhesus monkey and baboon are capable of producing anti-Gal (24)
, but there are no syngeneic tumor models in primates. The cloning of the mouse
1,3GT gene (31
, 32)
has enabled the generation of KO mice for this gene (33)
. These mice lack
-gal epitopes and are not immunotolerant to it (33
, 34)
. Recently, we have shown that by immunizing with RRBC membranes, these mice can produce anti-Gal IgG molecules in titers similar to those observed in humans (35)
. Here, we have used these mice as an experimental animal model for testing the hypothesis of increased immunogenicity of tumor vaccines engineered to express
-gal epitopes. The tumor model used in this study is a highly tumorigenic and very poorly immunogenic subclone of the mouse B16 melanoma, termed B16-BL6 or BL6 (36
, 37)
. We found this tumor to lack
-gal epitopes because of the suppression of
1,3GT gene expression (38)
. In contrast, most other mouse tumors express an abundance of
-gal epitopes (39)
. Thus, the carbohydrate make-up of BL6 cells simulates that of human tumor cells, which also lack
-gal epitopes.
We found that immunization of KO mice with irradiated BL6 cells engineered to express
-gal epitopes results in the generation of a protective cellular immune response, which prevents tumor development in a significant proportion of the mice challenged with live BL6 cells. In contrast, immunization with parental BL6 cells that lack
-gal epitopes does not elicit any protective cellular immune response.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
1,3GT and WT mice [C57BL/6 x DBA/2J x 129sv (H-2b x H-2d); Ref. 33
] were received from Drs. J. B. Lowe and A. Thall at the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor, MI) and were bred in our animal facility. All mice were maintained under standard conditions according to institutional guidelines.
Tumor Cell Lines
The BL6 cell line is a poorly immunogenic subclone of the B16 murine melanoma cell line and was originally isolated by its repeated invasion of the bladder wall of C57BL/6 mice (40)
. We previously performed stable transfection of BL6 cells with murine
1,3GT cDNA and isolated a subclone that continuously expressed
-gal epitopes (41)
. The transfected BL6 cells (designated BL6
GT) display cell surface characteristics that are similar to those of BL6 cells, except for the expression of
-gal epitopes on the former cells (41)
. We further found BL6aGT cells to express
2 x 106
-gal epitopes per cell (42)
. The tumor cells were grown in tissue culture medium consisting of DMEM supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum (Sigma Chemical Co., St. Louis, MO), 50 units/ml penicillin, 50 mg/ml streptomycin, and 2 mM L-glutamine (Life Technologies, Inc., Grand Island, NY).
Stimulation for Anti-Gal IgG Production in KO Mice
Prior to experimental procedures, 4-week-old KO mice received i.p. injections of 3 x 108 RRBC membranes every 2 weeks for 6 weeks to boost anti-Gal IgG titers to levels similar to those of humans. RRBCs were used for this purpose because the
-gal epitope is the major carbohydrate on the these red cells (43
, 44) . RRBC membranes were prepared by lysing packed RRBCs (Hemostat, Dixon, CA) with sterile water. After centrifugation at 15,000 rpm, membranes were washed thoroughly and resuspended in an equal volume of sterile saline for a final 50% (v/v) stock suspension.
Two weeks after the third RRBC membrane injection, sera were tested for anti-Gal IgG by ELISA using synthetic
-gal epitopes linked to BSA (
-gal-BSA; Dextra Laboratories, Reading, United Kingdom) as a solid-phase antigen as described previously (42)
. Serial 2-fold dilutions of mouse serum were made (starting at 1:50) and were added to 96-well microtiter plates precoated with 10 mg/ml
-gal-BSA in carbonate buffer (pH 9.5) and blocked with 1% BSA in carbonate buffer. The plates were incubated for 2 h at room temperature and then washed five times with PBS/0.05% Tween 20 goat antimouse IgG-horseradish peroxidase (1:500; Accurate Chemical, Westbury, NY) was added as a secondary antibody. Plates were incubated for 1 h at room temperature then washed with PBS/Tween 20. Orthophenylenediamine (1 mg/ml; Sigma) was added, and color development was measured on an ELISA reader at 492 nm. Only mice displaying anti-Gal IgG titers similar to those found in humans (i.e., titers of >1:400) were used further for the analysis of efficacy of tumor vaccines expressing
-gal epitopes.
Isolation of Anti-Gal from KO Mice
Anti-Gal from 2 ml of pooled sera from KO mice immunized with RRBC membranes was purified by affinity chromatography on a column of synthetic
-gal epitopes linked to silica beads (Synsorb 115; Chembiomed Ltd., Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; Refs. 22
and 23
). Anti-Gal was eluted from the column using glycine-HCl (pH 3.0), brought to a volume of 2 ml, and neutralized with 0.1 N NaOH. The concentration of the antibody was found to be 170 µg/ml. The restricted specificity of the purified anti-Gal for
-gal epitopes was confirmed by its binding to these epitopes on fetuin (referred to here as
-gal-fetuin) and the inability of this antibody to bind to fetuin with SA epitopes (referred to here as SA-fetuin; Ref. 14
). Production of
-gal-fetuin is described below. The binding of anti-Gal was determined by ELISA as described above.
Phagocytosis Assay
KO mice received an i.p. injection of a 10% Brewers thioglycolate solution (Difco Laboratories, Detroit, MI). Five days after injection, peritoneal macrophages were isolated by peritoneal lavage using PBS containing 2 units/ml heparin. Macrophages were washed three times in PBS and were incubated on glass coverslips (12 mm) in a 24-well tissue culture plate in complete medium at 2 x 105 cells/well. The macrophages were incubated with RRBCs (1% v/v), with or without mouse anti-Gal at a 1:50 dilution, in a final volume of 0.5 ml of complete medium for 3 h at 37°C and 5% CO2. After incubation, noninternalized RRBCs were removed by washing the coverslips three times with PBS, and adherent RRBCs were lysed by hypotonic shock. Coverslips were stained with Giemsa/Wright solution (Leukostat; Fisher Scientific, Pittsburgh, PA) and observed under light microscopy for phagocytosis of RRBCs by macrophages.
Synthesis of
-gal Epitopes on Fetuin
Substitution of the carbohydrate epitopes SA-Galß14GlcNAc-R on the bovine fetal serum protein fetuin with
-gal epitopes was carried out according to a previously described procedure (14)
. Native fetuin with SA (referred to here as SA-fetuin; Sigma) was desialylated by incubation for 2 h at 80°C with 0.05 M sulfuric acid. The desialylated fetuin was dialyzed and then incubated with recombinant
1,3GT (10 µg/ml) and 2 mM UDP galactose, as sugar donor. Subsequently, fetuin with several
-gal epitopes (referred to here as
-gal-fetuin) was isolated by affinity chromatography on Sepharose coupled with Bandeiraea simplicifolia I lectin (Vector Laboratories, Burlingame, CA) and eluted with 50 mM melibiose, with subsequent dialysis.
Interaction of Murine Anti-Gal with BL6aGT Cells
Differential interaction of anti-Gal with BL6
GT cells but not with BL6 cells was demonstrated by two independent methods.
FACS Analysis.
BL6 or BL6
GT cells were incubated with anti-Gal purified from serum of KO mice (10 µg/ml) for 2 h at 4°C. Subsequently, the cells were washed and incubated with phycoerythrin-coupled goat antimouse IgG (PharMingen, San Diego, CA) for 1 h at 4°C. After additional washing the cells were fixed and analyzed in FACSCalibur flow cytometer (Becton Dickinson, San Jose, CA).
Binding of 125I-Protein A.
Suspensions of 1 x 106 BL6 or BL6
GT cells/ml were incubated with a 1:50 dilution of serum from KO mouse or WT mouse, in PBS containing 1% BSA for 1 h at 4°C, with occasional stirring. After incubation, cells were washed three times in PBS, resuspended in PBS/1% BSA containing 2 x 105 cpm of 125I-protein A (ICN, Irvine, CA), and incubated for 1 h at 4°C. Cells were washed three times in PBS, and cpm of 125I-protein A bound to the IgG molecules on the cells were counted in a gamma counter.
Tumor Cell Vaccination
KO mice were immunized with RRBC membranes, and anti-Gal presence in their serum was confirmed by ELISA. Subsequently, the mice were vaccinated s.c. in the abdomen with 2 x 106 irradiated (4000 rad) BL6 or BL6
GT tumor cells. Two weeks after vaccination all mice were challenged s.c. in the back with 0.5 x 106 or with 0.2 x 106 live parental BL6 cells, as indicated in the individual experiments. Subsequently, mice were examined for tumor growth every day for 60 days at the challenge site. A positive score for tumor growth was defined as a tumor of
5 mm in size. Assessment of the extent of protection against tumor growth was determined by the percentage of mice remaining tumor free.
Histology
Developing tumors (<5 mm) were removed from the vaccinated KO mice 2 weeks postchallenge with live BL6 cells. Tumors were immediately fixed in formalin, sectioned, and stained with H&E or with T and B lymphocyte-specific biotinylated monoclonal antibodies (PharMingen, San Diego, CA). Tumor-infiltrating macrophages were identified by staining for peroxidase using 3-amino-9-ethylcarbazole, a peroxidase chromogen (Biomeda, Foster City, CA).
Statistical Analysis
Data from the tumor protection studies were evaluated by the Fishers exact test. Statistical significance was regarded as P
0.05.
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-gal epitopes (13
, 14)
. To demonstrate the suitability of the KO mouse system for studying the efficacy of tumor vaccines expressing
-gal epitopes, we first analyzed the ability of anti-Gal, produced in these mice, to induce phagocytosis of cells by APCs. For this purpose, anti-Gal IgG was isolated from sera of KO mice by affinity chromatography on columns expressing
-gal epitopes. The restricted specificity of anti-Gal for
-gal epitopes was confirmed by its binding to synthetic
-gal epitopes on BSA and not to N-acetyl-lactosamine linked to BSA (Fig. 1)
-gal epitopes (i.e.,
-gal-fetuin) but not to the same protein with terminal SA units (i.e., SA-fetuin; Fig. 1
|
-gal epitopes was studied with RRBCs. These cells are small enough to be visualized within a macrophage, and they express
-gal epitopes (24
, 43
, 44)
. Incubation of RRBCs with 10 µg/ml purified mouse anti-Gal and with adherent macrophages from these mice resulted in extensive phagocytosis of the red cells by the macrophages (Fig. 2)
-gal epitopes and that it can induce the uptake of cells expressing such epitopes by APCs.
|
-gal Epitopes on BL6
GT Cells.
-gal epitopes and that stable transfection of these cells with murine
1,3GT cDNA results in expression of
2 x 106 of these epitopes per cell without altering other cell surface characteristics (41
, 42)
. The use of these cells for studying tumor vaccine immunogenicity required the demonstration of specific binding of mouse anti-Gal to
-gal epitopes on BL6
GT cells. This was first demonstrated by fluorescence-activated cell sorting analysis with purified anti-Gal. As shown in Fig. 3
GT cells; however, only marginal nonspecific binding of the antibody was observed with the parental BL6 cells.
|
-gal epitopes on BL6
GT cells. This was achieved by the use of 125I-protein A, which interacts with the Fc portion of cell bound IgG molecules. BL6
GT and BL6 cells in suspension were incubated with KO or WT mouse serum diluted 1:50, washed, and assayed for 125I-protein A binding to Fc portion of the IgG molecules complexed to the tumor cells. Incubation of BL6
GT cells with KO mouse serum resulted in a 12-fold higher binding of 125I- protein A to the cells than the binding to BL6 incubated under similar conditions (Fig. 4)
GT cells would be formed in situ in KO mice.
|
GT Vaccines.
GT comprise an experimental model that simulates the human parameters that are necessary for measuring the efficacy of
-gal epitope-expressing vaccines in cancer immunotherapy. The efficacy of such vaccines was assessed by measuring the ability of irradiated BL6
GT cell vaccines to induce a protective immune response against challenge with live BL6 cells. KO mice with documented anti-Gal production, following immunization with RRBC membranes, were vaccinated with 2 x 106 irradiated BL6
GT or BL6 cells. All mice were challenged 2 weeks later with 0.5 x 106 live BL6 cells and monitored for tumor development for 60 days. As many as a third of the mice receiving the BL6
GT vaccination were protected from live BL6 challenge in two separate experiments (Fig. 5, A and B)
GT vaccines remained tumor free (Fig. 5A)
GT cells did not develop tumors for 60 days postchallenge. In contrast, all mice vaccinated with BL6 cells developed tumor within 1026 days postchallenge (Fig. 5B)
|
GT cells developed tumors because of a large tumor burden in the challenge and insufficient vaccination, the vaccination and challenge experiment was repeated with mice that were immunized twice with irradiated BL6
GT cells and challenged with only 0.2 x 106 live BL6 cells. As shown in Fig. 6
|
GT cells also elicited cellular immune response against BL6 cells in mice that developed tumors, KO mice were vaccinated with either irradiated BL6
GT or BL6 cells as described above (five mice per group), challenged with live BL6 cells, and developing tumors were removed at day 14 postchallenge (tumor size of
24 mm). The tumors were fixed, sectioned, stained with H&E, and examined for mononuclear cell infiltrates. Tumors from mice vaccinated with BL6 cells displayed no lymphoid infiltrates (Fig. 7A)
GT cells exhibited distinct mononuclear cell infiltrates that surrounded the developing tumors (Fig. 7B)
|
GT cells usually displayed higher level of melanin production than tumors in mice vaccinated with BL6 cells. This suggests that tumor cells adjacent to the infiltrating lymphocytes stopped their proliferation, possibly under influence of cytokines secreted by the lymphocytes, and became more differentiated as indicated by the excessive melanin production.
Overall, these histological studies demonstrated no cellular immune response against the developing tumor in mice vaccinated with BL6 cells. However, mice vaccinated with BL6
GT cells developed a cellular immune response, implied by the mononuclear cell infiltrates, which prevented tumor growth in many of the mice. In the rest of these animals, the tumor load in the challenge was too large, and proliferating tumor cells could not be completely eliminated as a result of the immune response elicited by the BL6
GT cell vaccine. It should be stressed that this cellular immune response was not strong enough to be detected in the spleens of the immunized mice. This is suggested by the finding that in vitro cytotoxicity assays with spleen cells from the immunized mice, as effector cells, revealed no specific killing of BL6 target cells (data not shown). Thus, the antitumor immune response could be demonstrated only in vivo.
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-gal epitopes can confer immune protection against the tumor lacking this epitope. We first showed that anti-Gal IgG produced in KO mice shares similar characteristics with human anti-Gal, in that it is highly specific for
-gal epitopes and can induce phagocytosis of cells expressing these epitopes by APCs. Subsequently, we showed that irradiated tumor vaccines expressing
-gal epitopes (i.e., BL6
GT cells) protect many KO mice from challenge with the poorly immunogenic parental BL6 cells. Moreover, challenged mice that develop tumors subsequent to vaccination with BL6
GT cells displayed extensive mononuclear cell infiltrates around the developing tumor. In contrast, mice challenged following immunization with BL6 cells developed tumors that lack any indication of lymphoid infiltrates. These observations imply that vaccination with BL6
GT cells elicits a cellular immune response against TAAs on the melanoma cells. This immune response can prevent tumor development in a significant proportion of the mice.
The observed specific binding of the mouse anti-Gal IgG to
-gal epitopes on BL6
GT cells and the ability of this antibody to induce phagocytosis by macrophages strongly imply that the immune protection conferred by the BL6
GT vaccine is associated with the in situ uptake of the opsonized vaccinating membranes by APCs. This uptake is important both for processing and presentation of TAAs and for the transport of the TAAs to the adjacent draining lymph nodes. Recently, it has become apparent that activation of tumor-specific naive T cells can occur only in the lymph nodes or spleen and that these T cells can migrate to the periphery and seek and destroy metastases expressing TAAs only after they are activated (1
, 3
, 4)
.
Our study supports the hypothesis that successful vaccination against weak TAAs may be achieved by effective uptake of the vaccine by APCs. The use of adjuvant or cytokines such as GM-CSF seems to effectively recruit APCs to the vaccination site (2
, 45, 46, 47)
. However, without specific "label" on the vaccinating tumor membranes, which would direct their uptake by APCs, the amount of weak TAAs transported to the draining lymph nodes may be insufficient for eliciting an effective immune response. These considerations may explain the success of GM-CSF-secreting B16 melanoma vaccines to protect against challenge (46)
versus the failure of GM-CSF-secreting BL6 vaccines (36)
. The latter tumor cell is much less immunogenic than the parental B16 melanoma (36
, 40)
, and thus far, there have been no reports on induction of a cellular immune response against BL6 cells. It is likely that in situ immune complexing between anti-Gal and
-gal epitopes on the BL6
GT vaccinating membranes enables the subsequent extensive uptake and processing of these vaccines by APCs. Without this critical step, the amount of processed TAAs in the BL6 vaccine might be insufficient for the effective activation of tumor-specific T lymphocytes, which are capable of destroying the tumor cells in the challenge. In view of the potent ability of GM-CSF to recruit APCs to the vaccination site, it would be of interest to determine whether GM-CSF secretion by vaccinating cells can further increase the efficacy of tumor vaccines expressing
-gal epitopes.
Tumor cells engineered to express
-gal epitopes were obtained in this study by stable transfection of tumor cells with the
1,3GT cDNA in a plasmid containing neomycin resistance gene as a selectable marker (39)
. Such an approach is impractical with freshly obtained tumor cells because, in most cases, these cells do not proliferate in vitro. Freshly isolated cells may be engineered to express
-gal epitopes by transduction with viral vectors (e.g., replication-defective adenovirus or herpes virus), which introduce multiple copies of the
1,3GT cDNA into the transduced cells. Transduction by virus may further elicit a "xenogenization" process, in which viral antigens expressed on the vaccinating tumor cells may enhance T-cell response to TAAs, as suggested by Kobayashi and colleagues (48
, 49)
. Moreover, it may be possible that
-gal epitopes on tumor vaccines partly mimic this xenogenization effect of viral antigens on the vaccinating tumor cell. It remains to be determined whether the viral antigens and
-gal epitopes on the vaccinating tumor cells have a synergistic effect on the immunogenicity of tumor vaccines. In addition to the method of viral transduction, vaccinating tumor cells or cell membranes can be engineered to express
-gal epitopes by incubation with recombinant
1,3GT and UDP-galactose, as we have demonstrated previously (13
, 14)
. This method results in the expression of
1 x 106
-gal epitopes per cell.
It could be argued that expression of
-gal epitopes on vaccinating tumor cells is similar to previous methods of "haptenization" of tumor vaccines (e.g., linking dinitrophenol hapten to the membrane of the tumor cell; Ref. 50
). Our method is superior to linking dinitrophenol to tumors because, in haptenization, the immune response to the hapten does not preexist in the patients and must be induced. The extent of this response and the subsequent opsonization of the vaccine are likely to greatly vary from one patient to the other. In contrast, anti-Gal is present in large amount in all patients, unless they are severely immunocompromised (20)
. Therefore, targeting of tumor vaccines to APCs by anti-Gal is likely to occur in almost any treated patient within a short period of time postvaccination, and it does not require the generation of an additional immune response to the hapten. In addition, haptenization may result in covalent linking of the hapten to TAA, thus destroying the antigenicity of TAA peptides. In contrast,
-gal epitope expression has no such effect on TAA because the modification is limited to carbohydrate chains and does not affect protein molecules.
The mechanism of tumor destruction by the infiltration of mononuclear cells is not yet clear. Previous observations demonstrated the role of cytotoxic T cells in the destruction of the parental B16 melanoma in immunized mice (2
, 46
, 47)
. It is possible that a similar mechanism facilitates BL6 tumor destruction. Immunostaining studies, indeed, demonstrated that the mononuclear infiltrates observed within the BL6 tumors primarily comprise T cells and macrophages. The exact TAAs recognized by these T cells also require characterization. It is probable that these TAAs are peptides and not carbohydrate epitopes, such as the core structure of the
-gal epitope (i.e., Galß1,4GlcNAc-R). This is because this core structure is also present on normal cells, and thus, the mouse is immunotolerant to it.
Overall, our studies suggest that expression of
-gal epitopes on tumor vaccines increases the immunogenicity of weak TAAs. It is probable that results of the similar use of autologous tumor vaccines, engineered to express
-gal epitopes in humans, would greatly vary from one patient to the other and, in many patients, would be insufficient for inducing an effective antitumor immune response. Nevertheless, this type of vaccine, used as adjuvant immunotherapy, will provide the immune system with an additional opportunity to be effectively exposed to autologous TAA peptides that are processed and presented by APCs. In some of the immunized patients, this exposure may be sufficient for the induction of an anti-TAA immune response that is effective enough to destroy metastases.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
1 This work was supported by an NIH Grant CA83592. ![]()
2 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed. Present address: Department of Cardiovascular-Thoracic Surgery, Rush University, 1653 West Congress Parkway, Chicago, IL 60612-3833. Phone: (312) 942-6373; Fax: (312) 666-0242. ![]()
3 The abbreviations used are: APC, antigen-presenting cell; TAA, tumor-associated antigen;
-gal,
-galactosyl;
1,3GT,
1,3galactosyltransferase; KO, knockout; RRBC, rabbit RBC; WT, wild-type; SA, sialic acid; GM-CSF, granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor. ![]()
Received 2/18/99. Accepted 5/14/99.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
-galactosyl epitopes by recombinant
1,3galacotysltransferase for opsonization of human tumor cell vaccines by anti-galactose. Cancer Res., 56: 3069-3074, 1996.
receptor (monocyte/macrophage)-specific immunogens. J. Immunol., 149: 3477-3481, 1992.[Abstract]
gb RII on human B cells can mediate enhanced antigen presentation. Cell. Immunol., 167: 188-194, 1996.[Medline]
-galactosyl specificity. J. Exp. Med., 160: 1519-1531, 1984.
-galactosyl IgG. II. The specific recognition of
-(1,3)-linked galactose residues. J. Exp. Med., 162: 573-582, 1985.
-galactosyl epitopes on nucleated cells. J. Biol. Chem., 263: 17755-17762, 1988.
1,3Gal epitope in primates. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 84: 1369-1373, 1987.
-galactosyl epitopes: a major obstacle for xenotransplantation in humans. Immunol. Today, 14: 480-482, 1993.[Medline]
13Gal epitopes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 90: 11391-11395, 1993.
-galactosyl determinant in hyperacute rejection. J. Immunol., 154: 5500-5510, 1995.[Abstract]
-galactosyl natural antibody. J. Exp. Med., 182: 1345-1355, 1995.
13galactosyltransferase. Nature (Lond.), 379: 85-89, 1996.[Medline]
-galactosyl epitope: a sugar coating that makes viruses and cells unpalatable. Cell, 86: 185-188, 1996.[Medline]
1,3-galactosyltransferase: expression cloning by gene transfer. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 86: 8227-8231, 1989.
1,3galactosyltransferase. A simple gene locus specifies four isoforms of the enzyme by alternative splicing. J. Biol. Chem., 267: 5543-5541, 1992.
13Gal epitopes implicated in sperm adhesion to the zona pellucida glycoprotein ZP3 are not required for fertilization in the mouse. J. Biol. Chem., 270: 21437-21440, 1995.
1,3galactosyltransferase-deficient mice produce naturally occurring cytotoxic anti-Gal antibodies. Transplant. Proc., 28: 556-557, 1996.[Medline]
-galactosyltransferase. Xenotransplantation, 5: 191-196, 1998.[Medline]
1,3galactosyltransferase gene transfection. Cancer Res., 55: 4168-4173, 1995.
-gal epitope expression on cells by a monoclonal anti-Gal antibody. Transplantation, 65: 1129-1132, 1998.[Medline]
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
U. M. Abdel-Motal, H. M. Guay, K. Wigglesworth, R. M. Welsh, and U. Galili Immunogenicity of Influenza Virus Vaccine Is Increased by Anti-Gal-Mediated Targeting to Antigen-Presenting Cells J. Virol., September 1, 2007; 81(17): 9131 - 9141. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M.-O. Sadoulet, C. Franceschi, M. Aubert, F. Silvy, J.-P. Bernard, D. Lombardo, and E. Mas Glycoengineering of {alpha}Gal xenoantigen on recombinant peptide bearing the J28 pancreatic oncofetal glycotope Glycobiology, June 1, 2007; 17(6): 620 - 630. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
U. Galili, K. Wigglesworth, and U. M. Abdel-Motal Intratumoral Injection of {alpha}-gal Glycolipids Induces Xenograft-Like Destruction and Conversion of Lesions into Endogenous Vaccines J. Immunol., April 1, 2007; 178(7): 4676 - 4687. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. Hewitt, H. Priddle, A. J. Thomson, D. Wojtacha, and J. McWhir Ablation of Undifferentiated Human Embryonic Stem Cells: Exploiting Innate Immunity Against the Gal {alpha}1-3Gal{beta}1-4GlcNAc-R ({alpha}-Gal) Epitope Stem Cells, January 1, 2007; 25(1): 10 - 18. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
U. Abdel-Motal, S. Wang, S. Lu, K. Wigglesworth, and U. Galili Increased Immunogenicity of Human Immunodeficiency Virus gp120 Engineered To Express Gal{alpha}1-3Gal{beta}1-4GlcNAc-R Epitopes J. Virol., July 15, 2006; 80(14): 6943 - 6951. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. R. Rossi, M. R. Mautino, R. C. Unfer, T. M. Seregina, N. Vahanian, and C. J. Link Effective Treatment of Preexisting Melanoma with Whole Cell Vaccines Expressing {alpha}(1,3)-Galactosyl Epitopes Cancer Res., November 15, 2005; 65(22): 10555 - 10561. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Suriano, S. K. Ghosh, B. T. Ashok, A. Mittelman, Y. Chen, A. Banerjee, and R. K. Tiwari Differences in Glycosylation Patterns of Heat Shock Protein, gp96: Implications for Prostate Cancer Prevention Cancer Res., July 15, 2005; 65(14): 6466 - 6475. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. J. Brady Antibody-Mediated Immunomodulation: a Strategy To Improve Host Responses against Microbial Antigens Infect. Immun., February 1, 2005; 73(2): 671 - 678. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
|