Dataset Information

Mapping the binding sites of antibodies utilized in programmed cell death ligand-1 predictive immunohistochemical assays for use with immuno-oncology therapies.

ABSTRACT: Programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression levels in patient tumor samples have proven clinical utility across various cancer types. Several independently developed PD-L1 immunohistochemical (IHC) predictive assays are commercially available. Published studies using the VENTANA PD-L1 (SP263) Assay, VENTANA PD-L1 (SP142) Assay, Dako PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx assay, Dako PD-L1 IHC 28-8 pharmDx assay, and laboratory-developed tests utilizing the E1L3N antibody (Cell Signaling Technology), have demonstrated differing levels of PD-L1 staining between assays, resulting in conjecture as to whether antibody-binding epitopes could be responsible for discordance between assays. Therefore, to understand the performance of different PD-L1 predictive immunohistochemistry assays, we aimed to distinguish the epitopes within the PD-L1 protein responsible for antibody binding. The sites at which antibody clones SP263, SP142, 22C3, 28-8, and E1L3N bind to recombinant PD-L1 were assessed using several methods, including conformational peptide array, surface plasmon resonance, and/or hydrogen/deuterium exchange mass spectrometry. Putative binding sites were confirmed by site-directed mutagenesis of PD-L1, followed by western blotting and immunohistochemical analysis of cell lines expressing mutant constructs. Our results demonstrate that clones SP263 and SP142 bind to an identical epitope in the cytoplasmic domain at the extreme C-terminus of PD-L1, distinct from 22C3 and 28-8. Using mutated PD-L1 constructs, an additional clone, E1L3N, was also found to bind to the cytoplasmic domain of PD-L1. The E1L3N binding epitope overlaps considerably with the SP263/SP142 binding site but is not identical. Clones 22C3 and 28-8 have binding profiles in the extracellular domain of PD-L1, which differ from one another. Despite identifying epitope binding variance among antibodies, evidence indicates that only the SP142 assay generates significantly discordant immunohistochemical staining, which can be resolved by altering the assay protocol. Therefore, inter-assay discordances are more likely attributable to tumor heterogeneity, assay, or platform variables rather than antibody epitope.

SUBMITTER: Lawson NL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8075905 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Host immunity recognizes and eliminates most early tumor cells, yet immunological checkpoints, exemplified by CTLA-4, PD-1, and PD-L1, pose a significant obstacle to effective antitumor immune responses. T-lymphocyte co-inhibitory pathways influence intensity, inflammation and duration of antitumor immunity. However, tumors and their immunosuppressive microenvironments exploit them to evade immune destruction. Recent PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors yielded unprecedented efficacies and durable responses across advanced-stage melanoma, showcasing potential to replace conventional radiotherapy regimens. Neverthless, many clinical problems remain in terms of efficacy, patient-to-patient variability, and undesirable outcomes and side effects. In this review, we evaluate recent advances in the immuno-oncology field and discuss ways forward. First, we give an overview of current immunotherapy modalities, involving mainy single agents, including inhibitor monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) targeting T-cell checkpoints of PD-1 and CTLA-4. However, neoantigen recognition alone cannot eliminate tumors effectively in vivo given their inherent complex micro-environment, heterogeneous nature and stemness. Then, based mainly upon CTLA-4 and PD-1 checkpoint inhibitors as a "backbone," we cover a range of emerging ("second-generation") therapies incorporating other immunotherapies or non-immune based strategies in synergistic combination. These include targeted therapies such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors, co-stimulatory mAbs, bifunctional agents, epigenetic modulators (such as inhibitors of histone deacetylases or DNA methyltransferase), vaccines, adoptive-T-cell therapy, nanoparticles, oncolytic viruses, and even synthetic "gene circuits." A number of novel immunotherapy co-targets in pre-clinical development are also introduced. The latter include metabolic components, exosomes and ion channels. We discuss in some detail of the personalization of immunotherapy essential for ultimate maximization of clinical outcomes. Finally, we outline possible future technical and conceptual developments including realistic in vitro and in vivo models and inputs from physics, engineering, and artificial intelligence. We conclude that the breadth and quality of immunotherapeutic approaches and the types of cancers that can be treated will increase significantly in the foreseeable future.

Dataset Information

Mapping the binding sites of antibodies utilized in programmed cell death ligand-1 predictive immunohistochemical assays for use with immuno-oncology therapies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets