Image_3_OCT4 and SOX2 Specific Cytotoxic T Cells Exhibit Not Only Good Efficiency but Also Synergize PD-1 Inhibitor (Nivolumab) in Treating Breast Cancer Stem-Like Cells and Drug-Resistant Breast Cancer Mice.tif
This study aimed to investigate the effect of OCT4&SOX2 specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) plus programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) inhibitor (nivolumab) on treating breast cancer stem-like cells (BCSCs) in vitro and drug-resistance breast cancer (DRBC) mice in vivo.
MethodsIn total, 160 breast cancer patients were enrolled following the immunofluorescence assay to detect tumor OCT4 and SOX2 expressions. CD154-activated B cells were co-cultured with CD8+ T cells (from breast cancer patients) in the presence of OCT4&SOX2 peptides, CMV pp65 peptides (negative control), and no peptides (normal control). MCF7-BCSCs were constructed by drug-resistance experiment and sphere-formation assay, then DRBC mice were constructed by planting MCF7-BCSCs. Subsequently, different doses of OCT4&SOX2 CTLs and PD-1 inhibitor (nivolumab) were used to treat MCF7-BCSCs and DRBC mice.
ResultsOCT4 and SOX2 correlated with poor differentiation, more advanced stage, and worse prognosis in breast cancer patients. In vitro, OCT4&SOX2 CTLs with effector-target ratio (ETR) 5:1, 10:1 and 20:1 presented with increased cytotoxic activity compared to CMV pp65 CTLs with ETR 20:1 (negative control) and Control CTLs with ETR 20:1 (normal control) on killing MCF7-BCSCs. Besides, PD-1 inhibitor (nivolumab) improved the cytotoxic activity of OCT4&SOX2 CTLs against MCF7-BCSCs in a dose-dependent manner. In vivo, OCT4&SOX2 CTLs plus PD-1 inhibitor (nivolumab) decreased tumor volume and tumor weight while increased tumor apoptosis rate compared to OCT4&SOX2 CTLs alone, PD-1 inhibitor (nivolumab) alone, and control.
ConclusionOCT4&SOX2 CTLs exhibit good efficiency and synergize PD-1 inhibitor (nivolumab) in treating BCSCs and DRBC.
History
References
- https://doi.org//10.3322/caac.21492
- https://doi.org//10.2967/jnumed.115.157834
- https://doi.org//10.7150/jca.7047
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31891-8
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.clbc.2016.05.012
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.ctrv.2018.07.004
- https://doi.org//10.3390/molecules23092193
- https://doi.org//10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-3001
- https://doi.org//10.1371/journal.pone.0063055
- https://doi.org//10.1038/sj.bjc.6602022
- https://doi.org//10.1172/JCI18044
- https://doi.org//10.7150/jca.20821
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.ajpath.2011.01.004
- https://doi.org//10.2217/imt.13.44
- https://doi.org//10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-878
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0960-9776(17)30186-8
- https://doi.org//10.1038/s41388-018-0656-7
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s11912-017-0627-0
- https://doi.org//10.1159/000464353
- https://doi.org//10.1182/blood-2010-12-326231
- https://doi.org//10.3892/ijo.2016.3337
- https://doi.org//10.2147/CMAR.S231375
- https://doi.org//10.3390/molecules26227021
- https://doi.org//10.3390/cells8070683
- https://doi.org//10.1016/S0959-8049(97)10123-X
- https://doi.org//10.1006/meth.2001.1262
- https://doi.org//10.3349/ymj.2018.59.1.35
- https://doi.org//10.1159/000354620
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.bbrc.2016.03.064
- https://doi.org//10.5625/lar.2011.27.2.147
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s12282-018-0844-x
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.ctrv.2016.10.003
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.canlet.2013.03.027
- https://doi.org//10.1038/modpathol.2011.49
- https://doi.org//10.1002/stem.2720
- https://doi.org//10.1084/jem.20170335
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.apjtm.2017.10.013
- https://doi.org//10.4238/gmr.15039001
- https://doi.org//10.1155/2013/871936
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.stem.2018.12.009
- https://doi.org//10.1016/j.intimp.2019.105872
- https://doi.org//10.1080/21645515.2020.1763693
- https://doi.org//10.1186/s12943-018-0928-4
- https://doi.org//10.1007/s40264-018-0774-8
- https://doi.org//10.1073/pnas.0915174107
- https://doi.org//10.1200/jco.2013.31.15_suppl.3019
CC BY 4.0