Advertisements
Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Immunodiagnostics’ Category


SEE OUR NEW CANCER BOOK ON AMAZON.com

Editor-in-Chief: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Advertisements

Read Full Post »


How Immunotherapy may sometimes make Cancer worse?

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

A potential explanation is

Advances in Brief Cancer Cell Motility-inhibitory Protein in the Dunning Adenocarcinoma Model1 (2013)

by James L. Mohler , Elaine N. Broskie , Dipak J. Ranparia , Et Al , Contact The Aacr Publications , L. Mohler , Elaine N. Broskie , Dipak J. Ranparia , Yousuf Sharief , William B. Coleman , Cary J. Smith

1 comment

  1. Avatar for Elaine Broskie
    Elaine Broskie2017-04-08 08:22 PM

    Some cancer cells may just be more differentiated and therefore easier to kill with immunotherapy. Simultaneously since they are more differentiated they may be the sort of cells that hold more rogue cancer cells in check. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.326.7968

 

How Immunotherapy may sometimes make Cancer worse?

Warning signs

Kurzrock began asking around, collecting anecdotes about people — and even about laboratory mice — whose tumours had advanced rapidly after treatment with an immunotherapy. Even after collecting examples from several sources, she felt nervous about releasing her results. “We thought, ‘Who’s going to publish this? They’re not going to believe us,’” she says.

Meanwhile, researchers at the Gustave Roussy Institute in Villejuif, France, had stumbled on the same problem. Charles Ferté, an oncologist at the institute, recalls attending a meeting in which several physicians reported bizarre responses to PD-1 treatment. “Some friends and colleagues were saying, ‘I treated lung patients with that drug and the tumour completely exploded in two weeks’,” says Ferté.

Ferté and his colleagues decided to launch a systematic study of tumour growth in their patients. Last November, they published their results: of 131 people who received anti-PD-1 therapies, 9% developed what the investigators called “hyperprogressive” disease, with accelerated tumour growth1. The phenomenon appeared to be more common in people over the age of 65.

On 28 March, Kurzrock and her colleagues published their data from 155 people treated with PD-1 inhibitors and other immunotherapies2. Six of the people had extra copies of MDM2 or MDM4 and 10 had mutations in a gene called EGFR, which is associated with cancer. The team did not see any correlation between age and rapidly worsening disease, but they did notice that tumours grew faster in four of those with the extra MDM2 or MDM4 genes, and in two of the people with EGFR mutations.

SOURCE

6 APRIL 2017 | VOL 544 | NATURE

http://www.nature.com/news/promising-cancer-drugs-may-speed-tumours-in-some-patients-1.21755

Read Full Post »


Reporter and Curator: Dr. Sudipta Saha, Ph.D.

During pregnancy, the baby is mostly protected from harmful microorganisms by the amniotic sac, but recent research suggests the baby could be exposed to small quantities of microbes from the placenta, amniotic fluid, umbilical cord blood and fetal membranes. One theory is that any possible prenatal exposure could ‘pre-seed’ the infant microbiome. In other words, to set the right conditions for the ‘main seeding event’ for founding the infant microbiome.

When a mother gives birth vaginally and if she breastfeeds, she passes on colonies of essential microbes to her baby. This continues a chain of maternal heritage that stretches through female ancestry for thousands of generations, if all have been vaginally born and breastfed. This means a child’s microbiome, that is the trillions of microorganisms that live on and in him or her, will resemble the microbiome of his/her mother, the grandmother, the great-grandmother and so on, if all have been vaginally born and breastfed.

As soon as the mother’s waters break, suddenly the baby is exposed to a wave of the mother’s vaginal microbes that wash over the baby in the birth canal. They coat the baby’s skin, and enter the baby’s eyes, ears, nose and some are swallowed to be sent down into the gut. More microbes form of the mother’s gut microbes join the colonization through contact with the mother’s faecal matter. Many more microbes come from every breath, from every touch including skin-to-skin contact with the mother and of course, from breastfeeding.

With formula feeding, the baby won’t receive the 700 species of microbes found in breast milk. Inside breast milk, there are special sugars called human milk oligosaccharides (HMO’s) that are indigestible by the baby. These sugars are designed to feed the mother’s microbes newly arrived in the baby’s gut. By multiplying quickly, the ‘good’ bacteria crowd out any potentially harmful pathogens. These ‘good’ bacteria help train the baby’s naive immune system, teaching it to identify what is to be tolerated and what is pathogen to be attacked. This leads to the optimal training of the infant immune system resulting in a child’s best possible lifelong health.

With C-section birth and formula feeding, the baby is not likely to acquire the full complement of the mother’s vaginal, gut and breast milk microbes. Therefore, the baby’s microbiome is not likely to closely resemble the mother’s microbiome. A baby born by C-section is likely to have a different microbiome from its mother, its grandmother, its great-grandmother and so on. C-section breaks the chain of maternal heritage and this break can never be restored.

The long term effect of an altered microbiome for a child’s lifelong health is still to be proven, but many studies link C-section with a significantly increased risk for developing asthma, Type 1 diabetes, celiac disease and obesity. Scientists might not yet have all the answers, but the picture that is forming is that C-section and formula feeding could be significantly impacting the health of the next generation. Through the transgenerational aspect to birth, it could even be impacting the health of future generations.

References:

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/shortchanging-a-babys-microbiome/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23926244

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26412384

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25290507

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25974306

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24637604

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22911969

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25650398

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27362264

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27306663

http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/14/11/2036

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4464665/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24848255

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26412384

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28112736

http://ndnr.com/gastrointestinal/the-infant-microbiome-how-environmental-maternal-factors-influence-its-development/

Read Full Post »


LIVE 9/21 3:20PM to 6:40PM KINASE INHIBITORS FOR CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY COMBINATIONS & KINASE INHIBITORS FOR AUTOIMMUNE AND INFLAMMATORY DISEASES at CHI’s 14th  Discovery On Target, 9/19 – 9/22/2016, Westin Boston Waterfront, Boston

http://www.discoveryontarget.com/

http://www.discoveryontarget.com/crispr-therapies/

Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence (LPBI) Group is a

Media Partner of CHI for CHI’s 14th Annual Discovery on Target taking place September 19 – 22, 2016 in Boston.

In Attendance, streaming LIVE using Social Media

Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Editor-in-Chief

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com

#BostonDOT16

@BostonDOT

 

KINASE INHIBITORS FOR CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY COMBINATIONS

3:20 Chairperson’s Opening Remarks

Guido J.R. Zaman, Ph.D., Managing Director & Head of Biology, Netherlands Translational Research Center B.V. (NTRC)

3:25 FEATURED PRESENTATION: Inhibition of PI3K and Tubulin

Doriano_Fabbro

Doriano Fabbro, Ph.D., CSO, PIQUR Therapeutics

The PI3K signaling pathway is frequently activated in tumors. PQR309 is a selective dual inhibitor of PI3K and mTOR (currently in Phase I) in cancer patients. The preclinical pharmacology and toxicology of PQR309 is presented, including its activity in lymphoma preclinical models. In addition, we elucidate structural factors defining the PI3K inhibitory activity and tubulin-binding of PQR309 derivatives.

  • PQR309 & GDC0941 arrest cells i G1/S (typical for PI3K/mTOR Inhibitor)
  • What drives Antiproliferative Activity of BKM120: PI3K or MT or both?
  • BKM120 Binds to beta-Tubulin/alpha -Tubulin Interfere
  • T2R-TTL complex
  • Orientation of BKM120 in PI3K
  • PQR309 – is a brain penetrating, PK and BAV by PO, good metabolic stability
  • PQR309 ANti-proliferative in Lymphoma
  • Clinical efficacy – Now in Phase II

4:05 Design and Development of a Novel PI3K-p110β/δ Inhibitor, KA2237 with Combined Tumor Immunotherapeutic, Growth Inhibition and Anti-Metastatic Activity

Stephen_Shuttleworth

Stephen Shuttleworth, Ph.D., FRSC, CChem, CSO, Karus Therapeutics Ltd.

The design and development of KA2237, a novel and selective inhibitor of PI3K-p110β/δ, will be described. This molecule has clinical potential in the treatment of solid and hematological malignancies, through its direct inhibition of tumor growth and metastatic spread, and through immunotherapeutic mechanisms. Phase I studies for KA2237 are scheduled to commence in Q2 2016 at the MD Anderson Cancer Center.

  • Design & Development of Novel, Oral, selective PI3K enzyme family: CLass I,II, III, IV based upon:
  • Class I IA IB
  • KA2237: DUal PI3K – p110beta/delta-selective inhibitor: CTL, Treg, p1 106 T sell response
  • Molecular signature in the tumor
  • WT p110delta, WT 1 10beta+, Mutant p1 10Beta+, PTEN-null, Ibrutinib-resistance, Growth inhibition; suppression of metastesis (p110beta
  • small molecule combination agents: potential aided by selectivity over p110
  • KA2237: clinical Pi3K-p110beta/delta Inhibitor- ATP -comtetitive
  • Doxorubicin -cytotoxic control
  • KA2237 superior activity to Idelasib
  • KA2237 – suppression of micro-metastasis in 4T1 synergenic model
  • Tumor Growth inhibition Pre-Surgery
  • Tumor Re-Growth Inhibition Post-Surgery
  • metastasis post surgery
  • Tumor-free mice post-surgery
  • CHemistry: IHC -pAKT; IHC – FOxp3+
  • KA2237 inhibits HGF-stimulated 4T1 tumor
  • 2004 – Preclinical develpemnt PI3K is reported
  • 2006 First PI#K is enter Clinical Trials
  • Targeting p1110Beta (PIKeCB) mutations in cancer with KA2237
  • DIscovery of the mutations lead drug discovery
  • KA@@#&: Potential in treatment of B-Cell Lymphom AS IN TARGETING IBRUTINIB RESISTENCE
  • GROWTH INHIBITION IN HEMATOLOGICAL CANCERS TUMOE CELL LINE PANEL
  • KA2237 – differentiated from competing Pi3K is Superior efficacy cf. p110delta
  • Combination: Not histone deacetylase but a tubulin deacetylase – Hsp90 ans Hsp70
  • T cell exhausion: Tumor growth inhibition vs Suppression of lung metastasis
  • Tumor BiologyRationale vs Clinical Agents
  • Oncogenic mutants, solid tumor supression magrophage, combination PD-1, CTLA$
  • FDA -approved kinase inhibitors

Summary

  1. phase I clinical study commenced in pathients with B cell Lymphoma
  2. Potential for treatment of solid and hematological malignancies

4:35 InCELL Pulse: A Novel Cellular Target Engagement Assay Platform for Drug Discovery

Treiber_Daniel

Daniel Treiber, Ph.D., Vice President, KINOMEscan, DiscoverX Corporation

InCELL Pulse is a quantitative and rapid method for measuring cellular target engagement potencies for small molecule inhibitors. InCELL Pulse capitalizes on two novel DiscoverX technologies, Enzyme Fragment Complementation (EFC) and Pulse Denaturation, which overcome the limitations of related target engagement methods. Examples across multiple target classes will be described.

  • InCELL Pulse – cellular Target ENgagement Assays
  • cellular thermal stabilization-based approach
  • simple, rapid and generig cellular alternative to CETSa
  • Thermal melting Curves vs Isothermal Inhibitor EC50 curves
  • Pulse Denaturation compound binding, or not binding
  • ABL1 Tyrosine Kinase – dose response curve – allosteric Inhibitor
  • MTH1 Hydrolase: InCELL Pulseassay validated for multiple substrate-competitive inhibitors
  • Validated InCELL Pulse Assays for Diverse Kinases
  • Kinase targets; BRAF, MEC1

Summary

  1. validation across proteins

TTP Labtech4:50 Potential Application of Fluorescence Lifetime Assays to Enable Robust, Rapid Protein Binding Assays

Wylie_Paul

Paul Wylie, Ph.D., Head, Applications, TTP Labtech

Current methods to screen protein binding interactions often have limitations due to the reliance on antibodies, but also interference from fluorescent molecules. Fluorescence lifetime has the potential to overcome these problems through directly labelled proteins and lifetime measurements that are independent of total fluorescence intensity.

  • Protein binding as a target class
  • protein-protein interactions (PPIs)
  1. FRET/HTRF
  2. FP
  3. AlphaScreen

What new in FLT?

  • long lifetime fluorophores, economical reagent platform
  • directly labelled reagents – no antibodies
  • independent of total intensity – reduced interference
  • robustness screen vs nuisance screen – caspase-3
  • productive; reduction false positives: FRET
  • protein-binding assays & FLT formats:
  1. protein – small molecule binding – CECR2
  2. protein – peptide binding: long and sholt lifetime
  3. Site-specific labelling vs Non-selective labelling
  4. Toolbox for PoC
  5. Detection reagents
  6. Further develop technology

5:05 Refreshment Break in the Exhibit Hall with Poster Viewing

 

6:40 End of Day

 

Read Full Post »

Milestones in Physiology & Discoveries in Medicine and Genomics: Request for Book Review Writing on Amazon.com


physiology-cover-seriese-vol-3individualsaddlebrown-page2

Milestones in Physiology

Discoveries in Medicine, Genomics and Therapeutics

Patient-centric Perspective 

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B019VH97LU 

2015

 

 

Author, Curator and Editor

Larry H Bernstein, MD, FCAP

Chief Scientific Officer

Leaders in Pharmaceutical Business Intelligence

Larry.bernstein@gmail.com

Preface

Introduction 

Chapter 1: Evolution of the Foundation for Diagnostics and Pharmaceuticals Industries

1.1  Outline of Medical Discoveries between 1880 and 1980

1.2 The History of Infectious Diseases and Epidemiology in the late 19th and 20th Century

1.3 The Classification of Microbiota

1.4 Selected Contributions to Chemistry from 1880 to 1980

1.5 The Evolution of Clinical Chemistry in the 20th Century

1.6 Milestones in the Evolution of Diagnostics in the US HealthCare System: 1920s to Pre-Genomics

 

Chapter 2. The search for the evolution of function of proteins, enzymes and metal catalysts in life processes

2.1 The life and work of Allan Wilson
2.2  The  evolution of myoglobin and hemoglobin
2.3  More complexity in proteins evolution
2.4  Life on earth is traced to oxygen binding
2.5  The colors of life function
2.6  The colors of respiration and electron transport
2.7  Highlights of a green evolution

 

Chapter 3. Evolution of New Relationships in Neuroendocrine States
3.1 Pituitary endocrine axis
3.2 Thyroid function
3.3 Sex hormones
3.4 Adrenal Cortex
3.5 Pancreatic Islets
3.6 Parathyroids
3.7 Gastointestinal hormones
3.8 Endocrine action on midbrain
3.9 Neural activity regulating endocrine response

3.10 Genomic Promise for Neurodegenerative Diseases, Dementias, Autism Spectrum, Schizophrenia, and Serious Depression

 

Chapter 4.  Problems of the Circulation, Altitude, and Immunity

4.1 Innervation of Heart and Heart Rate
4.2 Action of hormones on the circulation
4.3 Allogeneic Transfusion Reactions
4.4 Graft-versus Host reaction
4.5 Unique problems of perinatal period
4.6. High altitude sickness
4.7 Deep water adaptation
4.8 Heart-Lung-and Kidney
4.9 Acute Lung Injury

4.10 Reconstruction of Life Processes requires both Genomics and Metabolomics to explain Phenotypes and Phylogenetics

 

Chapter 5. Problems of Diets and Lifestyle Changes

5.1 Anorexia nervosa
5.2 Voluntary and Involuntary S-insufficiency
5.3 Diarrheas – bacterial and nonbacterial
5.4 Gluten-free diets
5.5 Diet and cholesterol
5.6 Diet and Type 2 diabetes mellitus
5.7 Diet and exercise
5.8 Anxiety and quality of Life
5.9 Nutritional Supplements

 

Chapter 6. Advances in Genomics, Therapeutics and Pharmacogenomics

6.1 Natural Products Chemistry

6.2 The Challenge of Antimicrobial Resistance

6.3 Viruses, Vaccines and immunotherapy

6.4 Genomics and Metabolomics Advances in Cancer

6.5 Proteomics – Protein Interaction

6.6 Pharmacogenomics

6.7 Biomarker Guided Therapy

6.8 The Emergence of a Pharmaceutical Industry in the 20th Century: Diagnostics Industry and Drug Development in the Genomics Era: Mid 80s to Present

6.09 The Union of Biomarkers and Drug Development

6.10 Proteomics and Biomarker Discovery

6.11 Epigenomics and Companion Diagnostics

 

Chapter  7

Integration of Physiology, Genomics and Pharmacotherapy

7.1 Richard Lifton, MD, PhD of Yale University and Howard Hughes Medical Institute: Recipient of 2014 Breakthrough Prizes Awarded in Life Sciences for the Discovery of Genes and Biochemical Mechanisms that cause Hypertension

7.2 Calcium Cycling (ATPase Pump) in Cardiac Gene Therapy: Inhalable Gene Therapy for Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension and Percutaneous Intra-coronary Artery Infusion for Heart Failure: Contributions by Roger J. Hajjar, MD

7.3 Diagnostics and Biomarkers: Novel Genomics Industry Trends vs Present Market Conditions and Historical Scientific Leaders Memoirs

7.4 Synthetic Biology: On Advanced Genome Interpretation for Gene Variants and Pathways: What is the Genetic Base of Atherosclerosis and Loss of Arterial Elasticity with Aging

7.5 Diagnosing Diseases & Gene Therapy: Precision Genome Editing and Cost-effective microRNA Profiling

7.6 Imaging Biomarker for Arterial Stiffness: Pathways in Pharmacotherapy for Hypertension and Hypercholesterolemia Management

7.7 Neuroprotective Therapies: Pharmacogenomics vs Psychotropic drugs and Cholinesterase Inhibitors

7.8 Metabolite Identification Combining Genetic and Metabolic Information: Genetic association links unknown metabolites to functionally related genes

7.9 Preserved vs Reduced Ejection Fraction: Available and Needed Therapies

7.10 Biosimilars: Intellectual Property Creation and Protection by Pioneer and by

7.11 Demonstrate Biosimilarity: New FDA Biosimilar Guidelines

 

Chapter 7.  Biopharma Today

8.1 A Great University engaged in Drug Discovery: University of Pittsburgh

8.2 Introduction – The Evolution of Cancer Therapy and Cancer Research: How We Got Here?

8.3 Predicting Tumor Response, Progression, and Time to Recurrence

8.4 Targeting Untargetable Proto-Oncogenes

8.5 Innovation: Drug Discovery, Medical Devices and Digital Health

8.6 Cardiotoxicity and Cardiomyopathy Related to Drugs Adverse Effects

8.7 Nanotechnology and Ocular Drug Delivery: Part I

8.8 Transdermal drug delivery (TDD) system and nanotechnology: Part II

8.9 The Delicate Connection: IDO (Indolamine 2, 3 dehydrogenase) and Cancer Immunology

8.10 Natural Drug Target Discovery and Translational Medicine in Human Microbiome

8.11 From Genomics of Microorganisms to Translational Medicine

8.12 Confined Indolamine 2, 3 dioxygenase (IDO) Controls the Homeostasis of Immune Responses for Good and Bad

 

Chapter 9. BioPharma – Future Trends

9.1 Artificial Intelligence Versus the Scientist: Who Will Win?

9.2 The Vibrant Philly Biotech Scene: Focus on KannaLife Sciences and the Discipline and Potential of Pharmacognosy

9.3 The Vibrant Philly Biotech Scene: Focus on Computer-Aided Drug Design and Gfree Bio, LLC

9.4 Heroes in Medical Research: The Postdoctoral Fellow

9.5 NIH Considers Guidelines for CAR-T therapy: Report from Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee

9.6 1st Pitch Life Science- Philadelphia- What VCs Really Think of your Pitch

9.7 Multiple Lung Cancer Genomic Projects Suggest New Targets, Research Directions for Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

9.8 Heroes in Medical Research: Green Fluorescent Protein and the Rough Road in Science

9.9 Issues in Personalized Medicine in Cancer: Intratumor Heterogeneity and Branched Evolution Revealed by Multiregion Sequencing

9.10 The SCID Pig II: Researchers Develop Another SCID Pig, And Another Great Model For Cancer Research

Epilogue

Read Full Post »


On its way for an IPO: mRNA platform, Moderna, Immune Oncology is recruiting 100 new Life Scientists in Cambridge, MA

Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

Deals:

Moderna has now raised $1.9 billion from investors like AstraZeneca – 9% stack [AstraZeneca’s Pascal Soriot helped get that all started with a whopping $240 million upfront in its 2013 deal, which was tied to $180 million in milestones.], with another $230 million on the table from grants. In addition to the financing announcement this morning, Moderna is also unveiling a pact to develop a new Zika vaccine, with BARDA putting up $8 million to get the program started while offering an option on $117 million more to get through a successful development program.

Novel Strategy in Biotech:

in biotech. Instead of grabbing one or two new drugs and setting out to gather proof-of-concept data to help establish its scientific credibility, the company has harvested a huge windfall of cash and built a large organization before even entering the clinic. And it did that without turning to an IPO.

Pipeline include:

  • The deal with AstraZeneca covers new drugs for cardiovascular, metabolic and renal diseases as well as cancer.
  • partners filed a European application to start a Phase I study of AZD8601, an investigational mRNA-based therapy that encodes for vascular endothelial growth factor-A (VEGF-A)
  • Moderna CEO spelled out plans to get the first 6 new drugs in the clinic by the end of 2016.
  • The first human study was arranged for the infectious disease drug mRNA 1440, which began an early stage study in 2015.
  • Moderna built up a range of big preclinical partnerships.
  • CEO Bancel says the number of drugs in development has swelled to 11, with the first set of data slated to be released in 2017.
  • Moderna also plans to add about 10 drugs to the clinic by next summer,

 

SOURCES

UPDATED: Booming Moderna is raising $600M while ramping up manufacturing and clinical studies

$1.9B in: Moderna blueprints $100M facility, plans to double the pipeline after a $474M megaround

http://endpts.com/moderna-blueprints-100m-facility-plans-to-double-the-pipeline-after-a-474m-megaround/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Issue:%202016-09-07%20BioPharma%20Dive%20%5Bissue:7155%5D&utm_term=BioPharma%20Dive

 

Moderna Therapeutics Deal with Merck: Are Personalized Vaccines here?

Curator & Reporter: Stephen J. Williams, PhD – August 11, 2016

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2016/08/11/moderna-therapeutics-deal-with-merck-are-personalized-vaccines-here/

 

at #JPM16 – Moderna Therapeutics turns away an extra $200 million: with AstraZeneca (collaboration) & with Merck ($100 million investment)

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN – January 13, 2016

https://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2016/01/13/at-jpm16-moderna-therapeutics-turns-away-an-extra-200-million-with-astrazeneca-collaboration-with-merck-100-million-investment/

Read Full Post »


The Strategy of Precision Editing the Cancer Cell Glycocalyx using an “antibody–enzyme conjugate” for Cancer Immunotherapy: Research Beyond “augment the activator or remove inhibitor, or both”

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Significance

Successful tumors are able to evade the immune system, which is otherwise capable of killing transformed cells. Therapies that prevent this evasion have become revolutionary treatments for incurable cancers. One mechanism of evasion is the presentation of sugars, called sialic acids, within the cell surface’s sugar coating, or glycocalyx. Here, we designed biotherapeutic molecules, termed “antibody–enzyme conjugates,” that selectively remove sialic acids from tumor cells. The antibody directs the enzyme to the cancer cells, the enzyme cleaves the sugars, and then the antibody directs immune cells to kill the desialylated cancer cells. The conjugate increased tumor cell killing compared with the antibody alone. Editing the cancer cell glycocalyx with an antibody–enzyme conjugate represents a promising approach to cancer immune therapy.

SOURCE 

 

AUGUST 22, 2016

Stanford chemists develop a new method of cancer immunotherapy

A team of Stanford ChEM-H scientists has discovered a novel form of cancer immunotherapy, which works by removing certain sugars from the surface of cancer cells and making those cells visible to the immune system.

“All of the world of immune therapy is now thinking about the immune system as calculating pluses and minuses. If you want to tilt the scale toward immune activation, you can either augment the activator or remove inhibitor, or both,” said Bertozzi, who is also an investigator with the Howard Hughes Medical Institute.

Current immunotherapies on the market work by blocking one of the inhibitory signals that are recognized by the adaptive immune system. Block those and the balance tilts in such a way that the immune system will attack the now recognizable cancer.

Bertozzi’s approach provides a second way of tiling the balance in favor of attack, this time for the innate immune system. She said this study shows just one example of how it could work, but her sugar-removing lawnmower could be used on a wide variety of cell types, not just those expressing HER2, and on different types of sugars.

“It’s almost always the case that you need a component of both the adaptive and innate immunity to get a robust reaction against infectious pathogens, such as during vaccination,” said Bertozzi. “The smart money suggests that the same will be true with tumors.”

Bertozzi said the approach also highlights the importance of paying attention to the much ignored glycocalyx.

SOURCE

Stanford chemists develop a new method of cancer immunotherapy

http://news.stanford.edu/2016/08/22/new-method-cancer-immunotherapy/

 

immobilization-ok

A symbolic representation of a glycocalyx chain attached to a cytoskeleton.

IMAGE SOURCE: google images

 

glycocalyx-145E1F0C801699F8CFE

image glycocalyx

IMAGE SOURCE: google images

Glycocalyx

Glycocalyx – www.futura-sciences.us576 × 284Search by image

The carbohydrates, glycoproteins and proteoglycans making up the glycocalyx

IMAGE SOURCE: google images

PNAS – Original Article

Precision glycocalyx editing as a strategy for cancer immunotherapy

  1. Han Xiaoa,b,1,
  2. Elliot C. Woodsa,b,1,
  3. Petar Vukojicica,b, and
  4. Carolyn R. Bertozzia,b,2
  1. Edited by Laura L. Kiessling, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, and approved July 11, 2016 (received for review May 24, 2016)

Abstract

Cell surface sialosides constitute a central axis of immune modulation that is exploited by tumors to evade both innate and adaptive immune destruction. Therapeutic strategies that target tumor-associated sialosides may therefore potentiate antitumor immunity. Here, we report the development of antibody–sialidase conjugates that enhance tumor cell susceptibility to antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) by selective desialylation of the tumor cell glycocalyx. We chemically fused a recombinant sialidase to the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-specific antibody trastuzumab through a C-terminal aldehyde tag. The antibody–sialidase conjugate desialylated tumor cells in a HER2-dependent manner, reduced binding by natural killer (NK) cell inhibitory sialic acid-binding Ig-like lectin (Siglec) receptors, and enhanced binding to the NK-activating receptor natural killer group 2D (NKG2D). Sialidase conjugation to trastuzumab enhanced ADCC against tumor cells expressing moderate levels of HER2, suggesting a therapeutic strategy for cancer patients with lower HER2 levels or inherent trastuzumab resistance. Precision glycocalyx editing with antibody–enzyme conjugates is therefore a promising avenue for cancer immune therapy.

SOURCE 

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »