Journal Articles

Metastasis enables immunogenicity through migrasome-mediated antigen release

Jiang and He et al. show that during vascular migration, circulating tumor cells release antigen-enriched migrasomes, which stimulate anti-metastatic immunity. Migrasomes contained cancer-testis and mutated antigens, which were captured by macrophages and dendritic cells in secondary lymphoid organs for cross-presentation and CD8+ T cell priming. In the 4T1 tumor model, Tspan4 deletion reduced migrasome formation and increased metastasis, whereas purified migrasomes suppressed metastatic growth, prolonged survival, and synergized with anti-PD-1. Reduced Tspan4 correlated with poor survival in an invasive breast carcinoma TCGA cohort.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

Jiang and He et al. show that during vascular migration, circulating tumor cells release antigen-enriched migrasomes, which stimulate anti-metastatic immunity. Migrasomes contained cancer-testis and mutated antigens, which were captured by macrophages and dendritic cells in secondary lymphoid organs for cross-presentation and CD8+ T cell priming. In the 4T1 tumor model, Tspan4 deletion reduced migrasome formation and increased metastasis, whereas purified migrasomes suppressed metastatic growth, prolonged survival, and synergized with anti-PD-1. Reduced Tspan4 correlated with poor survival in an invasive breast carcinoma TCGA cohort.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

ABSTRACT: Antigen release is a critical step in initiating antitumor immune responses, yet its regulation during metastasis is not well understood. Here we show that circulating tumor cells undergoing vascular migration produce migrasomes that serve as a metastasis-specific mechanism of antigen release. These migrasomes are enriched in tumor-associated antigens, including cancer-testis and mutated antigens, and are captured efficiently by antigen-presenting cells in secondary lymphoid organs, where they undergo cross-presentation to elicit CD8(+) T cell-mediated immune responses that constrain metastatic progression. Genetic inhibition of migrasome formation enhances metastasis, while administration of purified cancer-derived migrasomes restores immune-mediated suppression of metastatic growth. These findings show paradoxically that metastasis can enhance tumor immunogenicity through migrasome-mediated antigen release, highlighting a link between cancer dissemination and immune activation and establishing migrasomes as a distinct and potent platform for endogenous tumor antigen delivery.

Author Info: (1) Department of Cardiology, State Key Laboratory of Transvascular Implantation Devices, Heart Regeneration and Repair Key Laboratory of Zhejiang Province, Transvascular Implantat

Author Info: (1) Department of Cardiology, State Key Laboratory of Transvascular Implantation Devices, Heart Regeneration and Repair Key Laboratory of Zhejiang Province, Transvascular Implantation Devices Research Institute, The Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. jiang-dong@zju.edu.cn. (2) State Key Laboratory of Membrane Biology, Tsinghua University-Peking University Joint Center for Life Sciences, Beijing Frontier Research Center for Biological Structure, School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. (3) State Key Laboratory of Membrane Biology, Tsinghua University-Peking University Joint Center for Life Sciences, Beijing Frontier Research Center for Biological Structure, School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. (4) State Key Laboratory of Membrane Biology, Tsinghua University-Peking University Joint Center for Life Sciences, Beijing Frontier Research Center for Biological Structure, School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. (5) State Key Laboratory of Membrane Biology, Tsinghua University-Peking University Joint Center for Life Sciences, Beijing Frontier Research Center for Biological Structure, School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. (6) State Key Laboratory of Membrane Biology, Tsinghua University-Peking University Joint Center for Life Sciences, Beijing Frontier Research Center for Biological Structure, School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. (7) Department of Cardiology, State Key Laboratory of Transvascular Implantation Devices, Heart Regeneration and Repair Key Laboratory of Zhejiang Province, Transvascular Implantation Devices Research Institute, The Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. (8) Department of Cardiology, State Key Laboratory of Transvascular Implantation Devices, Heart Regeneration and Repair Key Laboratory of Zhejiang Province, Transvascular Implantation Devices Research Institute, The Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. (9) Department of Cardiology, State Key Laboratory of Transvascular Implantation Devices, Heart Regeneration and Repair Key Laboratory of Zhejiang Province, Transvascular Implantation Devices Research Institute, The Second Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. (10) State Key Laboratory of Membrane Biology, Tsinghua University-Peking University Joint Center for Life Sciences, Beijing Frontier Research Center for Biological Structure, School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. (11) State Key Laboratory of Membrane Biology, Tsinghua University-Peking University Joint Center for Life Sciences, Beijing Frontier Research Center for Biological Structure, School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. (12) Department of Laboratory Medicine, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. (13) Beijing Stomatological Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China. (14) State Key Laboratory of Membrane Biology, Tsinghua University-Peking University Joint Center for Life Sciences, Beijing Frontier Research Center for Biological Structure, School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China. liyulab@mail.tsinghua.edu.cn.

Chemotherapy enhances cancer vaccine efficacy and expands stem-like TCF1+CD8+ T cells

Noblecourt and Wicki et al. showed that carboplatin and paclitaxel (CarboTaxol) with viral vector vaccines expanded antigen-specific TCF1+CD8+ T cells during priming, slowed tumor growth, and improved survival in mouse models. Acting as an adjuvant, CarboTaxol induced early tumor- and vaccine-independent expansion of stem-like TCF1+CD8+ T cells that depended on TCF1/β-catenin activity. Adding PD-1 blockade to chemotherapy and cancer vaccines further improved tumor control and long-term survival. Expansion of TCF7+CD8+ T cells was also seen in ovarian and cervical cancer patients treated with CarboTaxol.

Contributed by Katherine Turner

Noblecourt and Wicki et al. showed that carboplatin and paclitaxel (CarboTaxol) with viral vector vaccines expanded antigen-specific TCF1+CD8+ T cells during priming, slowed tumor growth, and improved survival in mouse models. Acting as an adjuvant, CarboTaxol induced early tumor- and vaccine-independent expansion of stem-like TCF1+CD8+ T cells that depended on TCF1/β-catenin activity. Adding PD-1 blockade to chemotherapy and cancer vaccines further improved tumor control and long-term survival. Expansion of TCF7+CD8+ T cells was also seen in ovarian and cervical cancer patients treated with CarboTaxol.

Contributed by Katherine Turner

ABSTRACT: Therapeutic cancer vaccines are increasingly tested in clinical settings alongside standard-of-care treatments that often include chemotherapy, yet whether chemotherapy synergizes with cancer vaccines remains unclear. Here, we tested heterologous prime-boost viral vector vaccines in combination with various chemotherapy regimens. Both carboplatin plus paclitaxel (CarboTaxol) and cyclophosphamide improve vaccine efficacy and enhance antigen-specific CD8(+) T cell responses. These chemotherapies act as immunological adjuvants independently of tumor presence. Mechanistically, CarboTaxol induces an early, antigen-independent expansion of stem-like T cell factor 1 (TCF1)(+)CD8(+) T cells, an effect also observed in patients with different cancer types. Genetic or pharmacological disruption of TCF1 impairs the immunological adjuvant effect of CarboTaxol. Adding programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) blockade to viral vector vaccines and CarboTaxol further improves tumor control and survival. Together, these findings identify a TCF1-dependent mechanism underlying the immune adjuvant effect of chemotherapy and provide a rationale for clinical evaluation of this triple combination therapy.

Author Info: (1) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (2) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medici

Author Info: (1) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (2) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (3) Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (4) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (5) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (6) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (7) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (8) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (9) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (10) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (11) Centre for Immuno-Oncology, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (12) Department of Medical Oncology, Oncode Institute, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef, 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, the Netherlands. (13) Jenner Institute, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (14) Kennedy Institute of Rheumatology, Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (15) Department of Medical Oncology, Oncode Institute, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef, 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, the Netherlands. (16) Department of Medical Oncology, Oncode Institute, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef, 2, 2333 ZA Leiden, the Netherlands. (17) Centre for Immuno-Oncology, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. (18) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, de Duve Institute, UCLouvain, Brussels, Belgium; WEL Research Institute, Brussels, Belgium. Electronic address: benoit.vandeneynde@ludwig.ox.ac.uk. (19) Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK; Centre for Immuno-Oncology, Nuffield Department of Medicine, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. Electronic address: carol.leung@immonc.ox.ac.uk.

Antigen presentation requirements for effective cDC1-based cancer immunotherapy Spotlight 

Ex vivo-differentiated cDC1s offer superior tumor protection compared to monocyte-derived DCs used in DC vaccine trials. Pinesa and Minowa et al. found that vaccine-delivered cDC1s closely resembled tumor-infiltrating endogenous cDC1s transcriptionally. Robust tumor control upon cDC1 vaccination required both MHC-I and MHC-II antigen presentation on the same cDC1, and transient CD40 stimulation was insufficient to compensate for MHC-II KO on cDC1s vaccines, suggesting direct in cis coordination of CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses. Lack of host cDC1s in Irf8+32-/- mice with poorly immunogenic B16 tumors reduced the efficacy of cDC1 vaccination.

Contributed by Ute Burkhardt

Ex vivo-differentiated cDC1s offer superior tumor protection compared to monocyte-derived DCs used in DC vaccine trials. Pinesa and Minowa et al. found that vaccine-delivered cDC1s closely resembled tumor-infiltrating endogenous cDC1s transcriptionally. Robust tumor control upon cDC1 vaccination required both MHC-I and MHC-II antigen presentation on the same cDC1, and transient CD40 stimulation was insufficient to compensate for MHC-II KO on cDC1s vaccines, suggesting direct in cis coordination of CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses. Lack of host cDC1s in Irf8+32-/- mice with poorly immunogenic B16 tumors reduced the efficacy of cDC1 vaccination.

Contributed by Ute Burkhardt

ABSTRACT: Type 1 conventional dendritic cells (cDC1s) are important for generating and sustaining antitumor immunity. Accordingly, the abundance of cDC1s in human tumors correlates with improved outcomes in cancer. Capitalizing on this role, we previously demonstrated that vaccination with murine cDC1s, generated in culture from bone marrow cells (termed here "in vitro-derived cDC1s"), elicits durable tumor control in multiple preclinical models; however, the immunological mechanisms underlying the efficacy of cDC1 vaccination remain unclear. Here, we examined whether in vitro-derived cDC1s resemble tumor-infiltrating DC populations and whether MHC-I and MHC-II antigen presentation contribute to cDC1-mediated tumor control following vaccination in melanoma. As expected, MHC-I or MHC-II deficiency had minimal impact on the transcriptional state of cDC1s in homeostasis or following stimulation with the adjuvant poly dI:dC. Moreover, in vitro-derived cDC1s cultured under steady-state conditions closely resembled tumor-infiltrating cDC1s, whereas their poly dI:dC-stimulated counterparts resembled CCR7+ tumor-infiltrating DC populations, also referred to as mregDCs or LAMP3+ DCs. Our data further show that both MHC-I and MHC-II contribute to tumor control upon cDC1 vaccination and that coexpression of MHC-I and MHC-II on the same cDC1 is necessary for a robust vaccine response. We also identified an important function for host cDC1s in supporting the efficacy of vaccination with in vitro-derived cDC1s, as judged by impaired tumor control in Irf8+32-/- mice, which lack endogenous cDC1s. Overall, these results indicate that effective antitumor responses depend on MHC-I and MHC-II antigen presentation by vaccine-delivered cDC1s, with additional contributions from host cDC1s.

Author Info: (1) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. MD Anderson UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The Univer

Author Info: (1) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. MD Anderson UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (2) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (3) Department of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, Division of Discovery Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (4) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (5) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (6) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (7) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. MD Anderson UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (8) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (9) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (10) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. MD Anderson UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (11) Department of Bioinformatics and Computational Biology, Division of Discovery Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (12) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. MD Anderson UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. (13) Department of Immunology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States. MD Anderson UTHealth Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States.

A viral-based individualized neoantigen vaccine as adjuvant treatment in resected head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: a randomized Phase I trial

Spotlight 

Ottensmeier and Delord et al. report a randomized phase I trial of adjuvant TG4050, an individualized MVA-vectored neoantigen vaccine encoding up to 30 predicted neoantigens, in high-risk resected HNSCC. TG4050 was feasible and well tolerated, with no relapses among 16 immediately treated patients after 30 months median follow-up, compared to 3 of 16 who relapsed in the control arm. Neoantigen-specific T cell responses (median of 3 neoantigens per responder) occurred in 73.3% of treated patients and persisted for over one year. Vaccine-reactive CD8+ T cells were polyclonal, cytotoxic, and tissue-resident-like, comprising de novo and expanded pre-existing clones.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

Ottensmeier and Delord et al. report a randomized phase I trial of adjuvant TG4050, an individualized MVA-vectored neoantigen vaccine encoding up to 30 predicted neoantigens, in high-risk resected HNSCC. TG4050 was feasible and well tolerated, with no relapses among 16 immediately treated patients after 30 months median follow-up, compared to 3 of 16 who relapsed in the control arm. Neoantigen-specific T cell responses (median of 3 neoantigens per responder) occurred in 73.3% of treated patients and persisted for over one year. Vaccine-reactive CD8+ T cells were polyclonal, cytotoxic, and tissue-resident-like, comprising de novo and expanded pre-existing clones.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

ABSTRACT: In approximately one third of patients, resected head and neck squamous cell carcinoma will recur. We postulated that the induction of tumor neoantigen-specific T cell responses could prevent relapse. To this end, we developed TG4050, an individualized neoantigen therapeutic vaccine encoding up to 30 patient-specific predicted tumor neoantigens delivered by a Modified Vaccinia Ankara viral vector. We tested adjuvant TG4050 as single agent in a randomized phase I trial comparing treatment with TG4050 immediately after standard of care adjuvant therapy versus watchful waiting and treatment with TG4050 after recurrence (NCT04183166). The primary endpoint was safety, secondary endpoints included feasibility and efficacy, and immunogenicity was exploratory. TG4050 was well tolerated. Of 16 evaluable patients randomized the immediate treatment arm, none relapsed after a median follow-up of 30 months, while 3 of 16 relapsed in the control arm. T cell responses to vaccine neoantigens were detected in 73.3% of patients treated with TG4050 immediately, with a median of 3 neoantigens per responder. These responses were maintained throughout treatment and persisted for over one year after the last dose. Vaccine neoantigen-specific CD8+ T cells had an effector phenotype, displayed high expression of cytotoxic and tissue-resident markers, were polyclonal and comprised both de novo responses and amplification of pre-existing tumor-infiltrating T cell clones. Together, these translational data are consistent with the hypothesis in which single-agent delivery of TG4050 induces long-lasting tumor neoantigen-specific cytotoxic T cell responses that can prevent tumor recurrence.

Author Info:

Author Info:

Mutant KRAS peptide vaccine with dual checkpoint blockade in metastatic colorectal cancer: a phase I trial Spotlight 

Wang et al. evaluated a combination of nivolumab, ipilimumab, and mKRAS-VAX (six 21-mer synthetic long peptides targeting common KRAS mutations) in 13 heavily pretreated patients with MMRp/MSS metastatic colorectal cancer. Treatment was well tolerated, with a 15% overall response rate and a median progression-free and overall survival of 2 and 24.9 months, respectively. Direct ex vivo peptide stimulation revealed reactive T cell responses in 75% of patients, which reached 100% following in vitro expansion (mainly CD4+ and polyfunctional). Tumor infiltration by peripheral mKRAS-reactive T cells was associated with tumor regression.

Contributed by Ute Burkhardt

Wang et al. evaluated a combination of nivolumab, ipilimumab, and mKRAS-VAX (six 21-mer synthetic long peptides targeting common KRAS mutations) in 13 heavily pretreated patients with MMRp/MSS metastatic colorectal cancer. Treatment was well tolerated, with a 15% overall response rate and a median progression-free and overall survival of 2 and 24.9 months, respectively. Direct ex vivo peptide stimulation revealed reactive T cell responses in 75% of patients, which reached 100% following in vitro expansion (mainly CD4+ and polyfunctional). Tumor infiltration by peripheral mKRAS-reactive T cells was associated with tumor regression.

Contributed by Ute Burkhardt

ABSTRACT: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have limited activity in mismatch repair proficient or microsatellite stable (MMRp/MSS) colorectal cancer (CRC). KRAS mutations, present in approximately 40% of these cancers, can generate neoantigens that are targets for therapeutic vaccines. In this single-arm, phase I study (NCT04117087), we evaluated mKRAS-VAX, a pooled mutant KRAS (mKRAS) peptide vaccine targeting six KRAS mutations with nivolumab and ipilimumab in 13 patients with pretreated metastatic MMRp/MSS CRC. Both primary endpoints of safety and immunogenicity (within 17 weeks post-vaccination) were met. Secondary endpoints included treatment efficacy defined by RECIST v1.1 criteria. All adverse events attributed to mKRAS-VAX were grade 1 or 2, and the addition of mKRAS-VAX did not increase the frequency of severe immune-related adverse events beyond the expected profile of dual ICIs alone. mKRAS-VAX elicited an increase in tumor-specific mKRAS-reactive T-cells in 8/12 biomarker-evaluable patients (75%) by direct ex vivo IFN_ ELISpot and in 12 patients (100%) following in vitro expansion. Our findings support further development of mKRAS vaccines with ICIs for advanced MMRp/MSS CRC.

Author Info: (1) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University S

Author Info: (1) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (2) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (3) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. Department of Gastrointestinal Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. (4) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. (5) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (6) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. Department of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA. (7) Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. Department of Pathology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (8) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (9) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (10) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. (11) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. (12) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (13) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (14) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (15) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (16) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (17) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. (18) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (19) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (20) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. (21) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. (22) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. (23) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. nilo.azad@jhu.edu. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. nilo.azad@jhu.edu. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. nilo.azad@jhu.edu. (24) Department of Oncology, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. nzaidi1@jhmi.edu. Johns Hopkins Convergence Institute, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. nzaidi1@jhmi.edu. The Bloomberg Kimmel Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, Johns Hopkins University of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. nzaidi1@jhmi.edu.

A distinct antigen presentation pathway drives potent T cell immunity in lipid nanoparticle-based mRNA vaccines Spotlight 

Muro and Wang et al. studied mechanisms by which lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated mRNA (mRNA-LNP) vaccines induce significantly higher levels of antigen-specific cytotoxic T cells and T cell-dependent antibodies compared to conventional adjuvant-based immunization. Using model antigens, mRNA-LNP induced Th1-skewed murine CD4+ T cell differentiation, followed by production of class-switched IgGs (IgG2b and IgG2c) and long-term cytotoxic CD8+ T cells. Unlike traditional cDC1-mediated cross-presentation, mRNA-LNPs were primarily found in migratory cDC2 cells in draining lymph nodes, resulting in strong, persistent antigen presentation.

Contributed by Katherine Turner

Muro and Wang et al. studied mechanisms by which lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated mRNA (mRNA-LNP) vaccines induce significantly higher levels of antigen-specific cytotoxic T cells and T cell-dependent antibodies compared to conventional adjuvant-based immunization. Using model antigens, mRNA-LNP induced Th1-skewed murine CD4+ T cell differentiation, followed by production of class-switched IgGs (IgG2b and IgG2c) and long-term cytotoxic CD8+ T cells. Unlike traditional cDC1-mediated cross-presentation, mRNA-LNPs were primarily found in migratory cDC2 cells in draining lymph nodes, resulting in strong, persistent antigen presentation.

Contributed by Katherine Turner

ABSTRACT: Lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated mRNA (mRNA-LNP) vaccines trigger the potent differentiation of antigen-specific cytotoxic CD8 T cells in addition to antibody production. Despite its high immunogenicity, the cellular mechanisms by which mRNA-LNP induces such unusual immune responses remain largely unclear. Here, we show that mRNA-LNP induces potent and long-lasting CD8 T cell expansion through an antigen presentation mechanism that differs from that of conventional adjuvants. In mice immunized with mRNA-LNP, the number of antigen-specific CD8 T cells was one order of magnitude higher than that induced by combining antigen proteins with immunostimulants such as lipopolysaccharide or polyinosinic:polycytidinic acid. Intramuscularly administered mRNA-LNPs were mainly taken up by migratory type 2 conventional dendritic cells in draining lymph nodes, resulting in notably strong and persistent antigen presentation through major histocompatibility complex class I. Furthermore, CD8 T cell induction by mRNA-LNP required migratory dendritic cells but not the traditional cross-presentation pathway that is otherwise essential for antiviral and antitumor immunity. Thus, the mRNA-LNP formulation exerts unconventional immune responses through a different antigen-presentation pathway from conventional component vaccines.

Author Info: (1) Department of Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine and Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. Division of Molecular Pathology, Research Institute for Bi

Author Info: (1) Department of Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine and Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. Division of Molecular Pathology, Research Institute for Biomedical Sciences, Tokyo University of Science, Chiba, Japan. (2) Department of Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine and Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. (3) Department of Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine and Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. (4) Division of Molecular Pathology, Research Institute for Biomedical Sciences, Tokyo University of Science, Chiba, Japan. (5) Division of Vaccine Science, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, The Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. International Vaccine Design Center, The Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, United States. (6) Department of Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine and Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. (7) Department of Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine and Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. Division of Immune Environment Dynamics, Cancer Research Institute, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan. Immune Network Research Unit, Institute for Frontier Science Initiative InFiniti, Kanazawa University, Kanazawa, Japan. (8) Department of Laboratory Animal Medicine, National Institute of Global Health and Medicine, Japan Institute for Health and Security (JIHS), Tokyo, Japan. (9) Department of Laboratory Animal Medicine, National Institute of Global Health and Medicine, Japan Institute for Health and Security (JIHS), Tokyo, Japan. (10) Kyoto University Immunomonitoring Center, Liaison Office, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. Department of Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan. (11) Division of Vaccine Science, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, The Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. International Vaccine Design Center, The Institute of Medical Science, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. (12) Department of Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine and Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. Division of Molecular Pathology, Research Institute for Biomedical Sciences, Tokyo University of Science, Chiba, Japan. (13) Department of Immunology, Graduate School of Medicine and Faculty of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.

In vivo engineering tumor cells to a universal "all-in-one" cancer vaccine with full antigen spectrum Spotlight 

Wang et al. engineered an “all-in-one” cancer cell-derived vaccine (UniCVac) by co-expressing CIITA, NLRC5, CD80, and IL-2 in tumor cells to mimic professional APCs with both HLA-I and HLA-II antigen presentation, co-stimulation, and T cell growth signal. UniCVac cells presented antigens to both CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in vitro, driving activation and proliferation similar to APCs. UniCVac achieved potent antitumor activity in therapeutic (NSG) models, and induced polyclonal tumor-specific T cell responses, reprogrammed the immunosuppressive TIME to be immune-permissive, and enhanced tumor control in B16 and MC38 tumor models.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

Wang et al. engineered an “all-in-one” cancer cell-derived vaccine (UniCVac) by co-expressing CIITA, NLRC5, CD80, and IL-2 in tumor cells to mimic professional APCs with both HLA-I and HLA-II antigen presentation, co-stimulation, and T cell growth signal. UniCVac cells presented antigens to both CD4+ and CD8+ T cells in vitro, driving activation and proliferation similar to APCs. UniCVac achieved potent antitumor activity in therapeutic (NSG) models, and induced polyclonal tumor-specific T cell responses, reprogrammed the immunosuppressive TIME to be immune-permissive, and enhanced tumor control in B16 and MC38 tumor models.

Contributed by Shishir Pant

ABSTRACT: Cancer vaccines offer a promising strategy to initiate de novo T cell responses or enhance existing ones, either functioning independently or synergizing with T cell-modulating therapeutics to reduce tumor burden. The clinical development of cancer vaccines faces challenges such as limited antigen coverage, insufficient antigen presentation, immune suppressive microenvironment, and the availability of personalized vaccines. In this study, we developed a universal "all-in-one" cancer cell-derived vaccine (UniCVac) with comprehensive antigen spectrum coverage by programming tumor cells into antigen-presenting cells (APCs) through the codelivery of CIITA, NLRC5, CD80, and IL-2. This reprogramming mimics the professional APC phenotype, providing simultaneous HLA-I and HLA-II antigen presentation, costimulation, and T cell proliferation signals. These tumor-derived UniCVac can directly activate both CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells in vitro, independent of APCs. In addition, their costimulation and T cell growth-stimulating capabilities result in superior CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cell activation and proliferation comparable to traditional APCs, with enhanced PI3K-AKT pathways activation. Single-cell transcriptome analysis confirmed the similarity in cellular subtypes between UniCVac-activated and traditional APC-activated T cells. In mouse models, the UniCVac vaccination reprogramed the tumor microenvironment from immunosuppressive to immune-permissive, induced robust CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cell expansion in both preventive and therapeutic tumor models, and achieved complete tumor regression in vivo. Our approach provides a platform for the development of universal cancer vaccines with full antigen spectrum coverage and the ability to directly activate both CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells, offering potential combinatorial opportunities with existing T cell-based immunotherapies against cancer.

Author Info: (1) Sheng Yushou Center of Cell Biology and Immunology, School of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. (2) Sheng Yushou Center of Cell B

Author Info: (1) Sheng Yushou Center of Cell Biology and Immunology, School of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. (2) Sheng Yushou Center of Cell Biology and Immunology, School of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. (3) Sheng Yushou Center of Cell Biology and Immunology, School of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. (4) Sheng Yushou Center of Cell Biology and Immunology, School of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. (5) Sheng Yushou Center of Cell Biology and Immunology, School of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. (6) Sheng Yushou Center of Cell Biology and Immunology, School of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. (7) Sheng Yushou Center of Cell Biology and Immunology, School of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. (8) Sheng Yushou Center of Cell Biology and Immunology, School of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. (9) Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. (10) Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. (11) Department of Oncology, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China. (12) Cellular and Molecular Medicine, School of life sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. (13) Department of mathematics and statistics, Northeastern University at Qinhuangdao, Qinhuangdao, China. (14) Department of Biomedical Sciences, University College London, London, UK. (15) Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Shanghai Pudong New Area People's Hospital, Shanghai, China. (16) Sheng Yushou Center of Cell Biology and Immunology, School of Life Sciences and Biotechnology, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China. Department of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine, Shanghai Chest Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. Department of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Shanghai Pudong New Area People's Hospital, Shanghai, China. Engineering Research Center of Cell & Therapeutic Antibody, MOE, School of Pharmacy, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200240, China. State Key Laboratory of Microbial Metabolism, Joint International Research Laboratory of Metabolic & Developmental Sciences, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China.

mRNA lipid nanoparticle cancer vaccine platform delivering multiple STING activators for enhanced antitumor activity Spotlight 

Zeng, Xu, and Wang et al. developed an optimized cancer vaccine platform comprising a novel LNP co-encapsulating tumor antigen mRNA and two STING agonists. In primary BM-DCs, vaccination synergistically boosted CD80/CD86 expression and IFN-I secretion, and in mice, it enhanced antigen cross-presentation in spleens and tdLNs to induce antigen-specific CD8+ cytotoxic and memory T cell expansion. In tumor models, i.v. vaccine delivery inhibited s.c. tumor growth and vascularization. Vaccination upregulated gene sets for apoptosis and antigen processing, and reprogrammed immunosuppressive TAMs to a proinflammatory phenotype.

Contributed by Paula Hochman

Zeng, Xu, and Wang et al. developed an optimized cancer vaccine platform comprising a novel LNP co-encapsulating tumor antigen mRNA and two STING agonists. In primary BM-DCs, vaccination synergistically boosted CD80/CD86 expression and IFN-I secretion, and in mice, it enhanced antigen cross-presentation in spleens and tdLNs to induce antigen-specific CD8+ cytotoxic and memory T cell expansion. In tumor models, i.v. vaccine delivery inhibited s.c. tumor growth and vascularization. Vaccination upregulated gene sets for apoptosis and antigen processing, and reprogrammed immunosuppressive TAMs to a proinflammatory phenotype.

Contributed by Paula Hochman

ABSTRACT: mRNA-based cancer vaccines offer a modular and safe platform to elicit antitumor immunity, yet their efficacy is often limited by inefficient mRNA delivery and inadequate dendritic cell (DC) activation, both of which are essential for initiating robust cytotoxic T cell responses. Inadequate innate immune activation coupled with poor antigen presentation further diminishes their effectiveness, particularly in immunologically "cold" tumors. While stimulator of interferon genes (STING) agonists can enhance DC maturation and cross-presentation, their therapeutic utility is constrained by poor intracellular delivery and limited colocalization with tumor antigens. In this study, we developed a lipid nanoparticle (LNP) platform via high-throughput screening of ionizable lipids for potent mRNA delivery to DCs both in vitro and in vivo. To amplify immune activation, we coencapsulated the STING agonists c-di-AMP (AMP) and manganese (Mn(2+)) together with tumor antigen-encoding mRNA into the lead LNP formulation. This codelivery strategy synergistically activated type I interferon signaling, upregulated costimulatory molecules, enhanced antigen presentation, and elicited potent tumor-specific T cell responses and superior antitumor efficacy. Our results demonstrate that integrating innate immune stimulation with mRNA-LNP delivery provides a promising strategy to overcome current limitations in mRNA vaccine efficacy and to improve cancer immunotherapy outcomes.

Author Info: (1) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (2) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, P

Author Info: (1) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (2) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (3) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (4) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (5) Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (6) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (7) Chinese Academy of Sciences Key Laboratory for Biomedical Effects of Nanomaterials and Nanosafety, Chinese Academy of Sciences Center for Excellence in Nanoscience, National Center for Nanoscience and Technology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100190, China. ROR: https://ror.org/04f49ff35 (8) Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (9) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (10) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (11) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (12) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (13) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (14) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (15) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 Bioprocessing Technology Institute, Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Republic of Singapore, Singapore 138668, Singapore. ROR: https://ror.org/036wvzt09 (16) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (17) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (18) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (19) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (20) Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 (21) Department of Bioengineering, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 Penn Institute for RNA Innovation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 Institute for Immunology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 Cardiovascular Institute, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 Institute for Regenerative Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10 Center for Precision Engineering for Health, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104. ROR: https://ror.org/00b30xv10

The critical role of the endogenous immune compartment after CAR T cell therapy in recurrent GBM Spotlight 

Freeburg and Chafamo et al. performed longitudinal single-cell profiling of CSF and tumors from 18 patients with recurrent GBM treated with a single intracerebroventricular dose of bivalent EGFR-IL13Rα2 CAR T cells. CAR T cells peaked at 7 days and showed increased cytotoxicity and exhaustion in CSF. Endogenous cytotoxic NK cells, Tregs, and “scavenger” myeloid cells also increased dose-dependently. Responses correlated with increased CD56dimCD16+ NK cells, while Treg expansion and a high baseline number of immunosuppressive myeloid cells correlated with non-response, emphasizing the endogenous immune system’s role in CAR T cell efficacy.

Contributed by Katherine Turner

Freeburg and Chafamo et al. performed longitudinal single-cell profiling of CSF and tumors from 18 patients with recurrent GBM treated with a single intracerebroventricular dose of bivalent EGFR-IL13Rα2 CAR T cells. CAR T cells peaked at 7 days and showed increased cytotoxicity and exhaustion in CSF. Endogenous cytotoxic NK cells, Tregs, and “scavenger” myeloid cells also increased dose-dependently. Responses correlated with increased CD56dimCD16+ NK cells, while Treg expansion and a high baseline number of immunosuppressive myeloid cells correlated with non-response, emphasizing the endogenous immune system’s role in CAR T cell efficacy.

Contributed by Katherine Turner

ABSTRACT: Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common primary malignant brain tumor in adults, with a median survival of under 15 months and no effective treatment after recurrence. A recent phase 1 trial of intracerebroventricular bivalent chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cells in recurrent GBM, registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05168423), showed promising responses, including tumor reduction and prolonged survival. However, relapse remains common. We performed in-depth profiling of longitudinal cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) and tumor samples from responders and non-responders to characterize immune dynamics following infusion. Our study reveals that, although CAR T cells activate post infusion across all patients, outcomes were defined by divergent remodeling of the endogenous immune landscape. Cytotoxic natural killer cell expansion characterized responders, whereas regulatory T cell expansion and abundant baseline immunosuppressive scavenger myeloid cells characterized non-responders. These findings indicate that host immune cells play a critical role in CAR T cell therapy for GBM, suggesting that combinatorial strategies modulating the endogenous immune compartment could improve next-generation treatments.

Author Info: (1) Cancer Biology Department, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (2) Cancer Biology Department, Perelman School of Medicin

Author Info: (1) Cancer Biology Department, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (2) Cancer Biology Department, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (3) Cancer Biology Department, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (4) Department of Pathology, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine and Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, USA. (5) Cancer Biology Department, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (6) Cancer Biology Department, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (7) Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; GBM Translational Center of Excellence, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Cell and Molecular Biology Graduate Group, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (8) Department of Pathology, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine and Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, USA. (9) Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; GBM Translational Center of Excellence, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (10) Neuroscience Graduate Group, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (11) Department of Neuroscience and Mahoney Institute for Neurosciences, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (12) Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; GBM Translational Center of Excellence, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (13) Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; GBM Translational Center of Excellence, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (14) Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (15) Neuroscience Graduate Group, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (16) Department of Biology, School of Arts and Sciences, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (17) UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, INSERM, PARCC, Paris, France; Department of Immunology, APHP, H™pital EuropŽen Georges Pompidou (HEGP)-H™pital Necker, Paris, France. (18) Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, INSERM, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, 75006 Paris, France. (19) CellAction, Center for Cancer Immunotherapy, INSERM U932, Institut Curie, Saint-Cloud, France. (20) Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; GBM Translational Center of Excellence, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (21) Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; GBM Translational Center of Excellence, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (22) Clinical Immunology Laboratory, Institut Curie, Paris, France. (23) Institut Curie, PSL University, INSERM U932, Immunity and Cancer, 75005 Paris, France. (24) Department of Translational Research, PSL University, Institut Curie, Paris, France; INSERM U1330, PSL University, Institut Curie Research Center, Paris, France. (25) CellAction, Center for Cancer Immunotherapy, INSERM U932, Institut Curie, Saint-Cloud, France. (26) CellAction, Center for Cancer Immunotherapy, INSERM U932, Institut Curie, Saint-Cloud, France; Clinical Hematology Unit, Institut Curie, Saint-Cloud, France. (27) Departments of Dermatology and Pathology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (28) Department of Dermatology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. (29) Kite, a Gilead Company, Santa Monica, CA, USA. (30) Comparative Pathology Core, Department of Pathobiology, University of Pennsylvania, School of Veterinary Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (31) Comparative Pathology Core, Department of Pathobiology, University of Pennsylvania, School of Veterinary Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (32) Comparative Pathology Core, Department of Pathobiology, University of Pennsylvania, School of Veterinary Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (33) Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (34) Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (35) Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (36) Department of Neuroscience and Mahoney Institute for Neurosciences, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Institute for Regenerative Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (37) Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, INSERM, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, 75006 Paris, France; ƒquipe labellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, 15 rue de l'Žcole de mŽdecine, 75006 Paris, France. (38) Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Sorbonne UniversitŽ, INSERM, UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, 75006 Paris, France; ƒquipe labellisŽe Ligue Contre le Cancer, Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, 15 rue de l'Žcole de mŽdecine, 75006 Paris, France. (39) UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, INSERM, PARCC, Paris, France; Department of Immunology, APHP, H™pital EuropŽen Georges Pompidou (HEGP)-H™pital Necker, Paris, France. (40) Department of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Institute for Immunology and Immune Health, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (41) Institut Curie, PSL University, INSERM U932, Immunity and Cancer, 75005 Paris, France. (42) Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Department of Microbiology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (43) GBM Translational Center of Excellence, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (44) Department of Neuroscience and Mahoney Institute for Neurosciences, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; GBM Translational Center of Excellence, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Institute for Regenerative Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA; Epigenetics Institute, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (45) Department of Pathology, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine and Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, OH, USA; Department of Pathology, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA. (46) GBM Translational Center of Excellence, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Department of Medicine, Division of Hematology and Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (47) Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; GBM Translational Center of Excellence, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Parker Institute for Cancer Immunotherapy, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (48) Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; GBM Translational Center of Excellence, Abramson Cancer Center, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: binderz@pennmedicine.upenn.edu. (49) Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; UniversitŽ Paris CitŽ, INSERM, PARCC, Paris, France; Clinical Laboratory, H™pital Foch, Suresnes, France. Electronic address: c.alanio@hopital-foch.com. (50) Cancer Biology Department, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA; Center for Cellular Immunotherapies, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA. Electronic address: dana.silverbush@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.

Adjuvant personalized multivalent neoantigen DNA vaccination for MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma: a phase 1 trial Spotlight 

In a phase 1 study, Garfinkle et al. vaccinated 9 patients with MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma with a personalized DNA-based vaccine following surgical resection and radiation. GNOS-PVO1 encoded up to 40 neoantigens identified from 3–4 distinct tumor regions per patient, and was well tolerated. The median 24-month survival rate was 33%, including a patient who remained disease-free over 4 years after diagnosis. Survival correlated with increases in peripheral CD8+CD69+ and CD8+IFNγ+ T cells. Increased tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T cells, with expanded de novo and pre-existing TCR clonotypes in the tumor and blood, were observed upon vaccination.

Contributed by Ute Burkhardt

In a phase 1 study, Garfinkle et al. vaccinated 9 patients with MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma with a personalized DNA-based vaccine following surgical resection and radiation. GNOS-PVO1 encoded up to 40 neoantigens identified from 3–4 distinct tumor regions per patient, and was well tolerated. The median 24-month survival rate was 33%, including a patient who remained disease-free over 4 years after diagnosis. Survival correlated with increases in peripheral CD8+CD69+ and CD8+IFNγ+ T cells. Increased tumor-infiltrating CD8+ T cells, with expanded de novo and pre-existing TCR clonotypes in the tumor and blood, were observed upon vaccination.

Contributed by Ute Burkhardt

ABSTRACT: Glioblastoma is a fatal disease with a median prognosis of 12-18_months. Recent studies have shown encouraging results using neoantigen-based vaccines to stimulate glioblastoma-directed immune responses, but overall immunogenicity has been low. Here, we report the results of an open-label, single-arm, phase 1 clinical trial (GT-20) to evaluate the safety and feasibility (primary endpoints) as well as immunogenicity and preliminary clinical activity (secondary endpoints) of GNOS-PV01 monotherapy, a DNA-based personalized therapeutic cancer vaccine administered following surgical resection and radiation for patients with MGMT unmethylated glioblastoma. The GT-20 study vaccinated nine patients, using up to 40 neoantigens per patient (range, 17-40) without causing any serious adverse events, unexpected toxicities or dose-limiting toxicities. The vaccine induced activation and expansion of circulating peripheral T_cells in all evaluated patients, except one who was being treated with dexamethasone. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate 6_month progression-free survival and 12_month overall survival; each observed in 66.7% of patients. Median progression-free survival was 8.5_months, median overall survival was 16.3_months and survival at 24_months was 33%, including one long-term survivor still alive 4_years from the time of initial surgery. This study met the pre-specified endpoints and supports the use of GNOS-PV01 as a potentially impactful component of glioblastoma immunotherapy. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04015700 .

Author Info: (1) The Steve and Cindy Rasmussen Institute for Genomic Medicine, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA. (2) Geneos Therapeutics, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (3) Department

Author Info: (1) The Steve and Cindy Rasmussen Institute for Genomic Medicine, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA. (2) Geneos Therapeutics, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (3) Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (4) Division of Medical Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (5) Department of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (6) Division of Medical Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. The Brain Tumor Center at Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. (7) The Brain Tumor Center at Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. Department of Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. (8) McDonnell Genome Institute, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (9) McDonnell Genome Institute, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (10) McDonnell Genome Institute, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (11) Geneos Therapeutics, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (12) The Steve and Cindy Rasmussen Institute for Genomic Medicine, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA. (13) The Steve and Cindy Rasmussen Institute for Genomic Medicine, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA. Biomedical Sciences Graduate Program, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA. (14) The Steve and Cindy Rasmussen Institute for Genomic Medicine, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA. The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA. (15) Geneos Therapeutics, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (16) Geneos Therapeutics, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (17) Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (18) Geneos Therapeutics, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (19) Geneos Therapeutics, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (20) BioProcess Advantage LLC, Westfield, NJ, USA. (21) Department of Neurology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. (22) Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. The Brain Tumor Center at Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. (23) Department of Neurosurgery, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA. (24) The Brain Tumor Center at Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (25) Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (26) The Brain Tumor Center at Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (27) The Brain Tumor Center at Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. Department of Neurosurgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (28) Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. McDonnell Genome Institute, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. Department of Genetics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (29) Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. McDonnell Genome Institute, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. Department of Genetics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (30) Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. McDonnell Genome Institute, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. Department of Genetics, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (31) Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. (32) The Steve and Cindy Rasmussen Institute for Genomic Medicine, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA. Department of Pediatrics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA. (33) The Steve and Cindy Rasmussen Institute for Genomic Medicine, Nationwide Children's Hospital, Columbus, OH, USA. Department of Pediatrics, The Ohio State University College of Medicine, Columbus, OH, USA. (34) Geneos Therapeutics, Philadelphia, PA, USA. (35) Department of Neurosurgery, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. (36) Division of Medical Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. tannerjohanns@wustl.edu. The Brain Tumor Center at Siteman Cancer Center, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO, USA. tannerjohanns@wustl.edu. Andrew M. and Jane M. Bursky Center for Human Immunology and Immunotherapy Program, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA. tannerjohanns@wustl.edu.

Close Modal

Small change for you. Big change for us!

This Thanksgiving season, show your support for cancer research by donating your change.

In less than a minute, link your credit card with our partner RoundUp App.

Every purchase you make with that card will be rounded up and the change will be donated to ACIR.

All transactions are securely made through Stripe.