Dataset Information

CSPG4-Specific CAR.CIK Lymphocytes as a Novel Therapy for the Treatment of Multiple Soft-Tissue Sarcoma Histotypes.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

No effective therapy is available for unresectable soft-tissue sarcomas (STS). This unmet clinical need prompted us to test whether chondroitin sulfate proteoglycan 4 (CSPG4)-specific chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-redirected cytokine-induced killer lymphocytes (CAR.CIK) are effective in eliminating tumor cells derived from multiple STS histotypes in vitro and in immunodeficient mice.

Experimental design

The experimental platform included patient-derived CAR.CIK and cell lines established from multiple STS histotypes. CAR.CIK were transduced with a retroviral vector encoding second-generation CSPG4-specific CAR (CSPG4-CAR) with 4-1BB costimulation. The functional activity of CSPG4-CAR.CIK was explored in vitro, in two- and three-dimensional STS cultures, and in three in vivo STS xenograft models.

Results

CSPG4-CAR.CIK were efficiently generated from patients with STS. CSPG4 was highly expressed in multiple STS histotypes by in silico analysis and on all 16 STS cell lines tested by flow cytometry. CSPG4-CAR.CIK displayed superior in vitro cytolytic activity against multiple STS histotypes as compared with paired unmodified control CIK. CSPG4-CAR.CIK also showed strong antitumor activity against STS spheroids; this effect was associated with tumor recruitment, infiltration, and matrix penetration. CSPG4-CAR.CIK significantly delayed or reversed tumor growth in vivo in three STS xenograft models (leiomyosarcoma, undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma, and fibrosarcoma). Tumor growth inhibition persisted for up to 2 weeks following the last administration of CSPG4-CAR.CIK.

Conclusions

This study has shown that CSPG4-CAR.CIK effectively targets multiple STS histotypes in vitro and in immunodeficient mice. These results provide a strong rationale to translate the novel strategy we have developed into a clinical setting.

SUBMITTER: Leuci V

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7710537 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) represent a rare tumor entity, accounting for less than 1% of adult malignancies. The cornerstone of curative intent treatment is surgery with free margins, although the extent of the surgical approach has been subject to change in the last decades. Multimodal approaches usually including radiation therapy have replaced extensive surgical procedures in order to preserve functionality while maintaining adequate local control. However, the possibility to apply adequate radiation doses by external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) can be limited in some situation especially in case of directly adjacent organs at risk with low radiation tolerance. Application of at least a part of the total dose via intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT) with a single fraction during the surgical procedure may overcome those limitations, because radiosensitive structures can be moved out of the radiation field resulting in reduced toxicity while the enhanced biological effectivity of the high single dose improves local control. The current review summarizes rationale, techniques, oncological and functional outcomes including possible pitfalls and associated toxicities based on the published literature for IORT focusing on extremity and retroperitoneal STS. In extremity STS, combination of limb-sparing surgery, IORT and pre- or postoperative EBRT with moderate doses consistently achieved excellent local control rates at least comparable to approaches using EBRT alone but usually including patient cohorts with higher proportions of unfavourable prognostic factors. Further on, IORT containing approaches resulted in very high limb preservation rates and good functional outcome, probably related to the smaller high dose volume. In retroperitoneal STS, the combination of preoperative EBRT, surgery and IORT consistently achieved high local control rates which seem superior to surgery alone or surgery with EBRT at least with regard to local control and in some reports even to overall survival. Further on, preoperative EBRT in combination with IORT seems to be superior to the opposite combination with regard to local control and toxicity. No major differences in wound healing disturbances or postoperative complication rates can be observed with IORT compared to non-IORT containing approaches. Neuropathy of major nerves remains a dose limiting toxicity requiring dose restrictions or exclusion from target volume. Gastrointestinal structures and ureters should be excluded from the IORT area whenever possible and the IORT volume should be restricted to the available minimum. Nevertheless, IORT represents an ideal boosting method if combined with EBRT and properly executed by experiences users which should be further evaluated preferably in prospective randomized trials.