Data from Phenotypic Models of CAR T-Cell Activation Elucidate the Pivotal Regulatory Role of CAR Downmodulation
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract Adoptive cell immunotherapy with chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) showed limited potency in solid tumors, despite durable remissions for hematopoietic malignancies. Therefore, an investigation of ways to enhance the efficacy of CARs' antitumor response has been engaged upon. We previously examined the interplay between the biophysical parameters of CAR binding (i.e., affinity, avidity, and antigen density), as regulators of CAR T-cell activity and detected nonmonotonic behaviors of affinity and antigen density and an interrelation between avidity and antigen density. Here, we built an evolving phenotypic model of CAR T-cell regulation, which suggested that receptor downmodulation is a key determinant of CAR T-cell function. We verified this assumption by measuring and manipulating receptor downmodulation and intracellular signaling processes. CAR downmodulation inhibition, via actin polymerization inhibition, but not inhibition of regulatory inhibitory phosphatases, was able to increase CAR T-cell responses. In addition, we documented trogocytosis in CAR T cells that depends on actin polymerization. In summary, our study modeled the parameters that govern CAR T-cell engagement and revealed an underappreciated mechanism of T-cell regulation. These results have a potential to predict and therefore advance the rational design of CAR T cells for adoptive cell treatments. See related article on p. 872
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Data from Phenotypic Models of CAR T-Cell Activation Elucidate the Pivotal Regulatory Role of CAR Downmodulation
- Date Crossref
- 12/07/2024
- Éditeur
- American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)
- Type
- posted-content
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.