中国普外基础与临床杂志

中国普外基础与临床杂志

一种特异性靶向性淋巴细胞对荷瘤裸鼠的治疗观察

查看全文

目的 观察癌胚抗原(CEA)阳性靶向性淋巴细胞对胃癌细胞体内及体外靶向性治疗作用。 方法 从健康人外周血中分离单个核细胞(PBMC),通过脂质体lipofectamine 2000 介导的细胞转染将重组真核表达载体 anti-CEA-scFv-CD3ζ-pcDNA3.0 介导的细胞转染导入 PBMC,以获取 CEA 阳性靶向性淋巴细胞(以下简称靶淋巴细胞);将不含 anti-CEA-scFv-CD3ζ-pcDNA3.0 融合基因片段的 pcDNA3.0 真核表达载体转染入 PBMC,获取的淋巴细胞简称为空载体淋巴细胞。将上述两种淋巴细胞分别与 CEA 阳性 KATOⅢ胃癌细胞和 CEA 阴性 BGC-823 胃癌细胞共培养,观察不同靶淋巴细胞与胃癌细胞共培养(24 h 或 36 h )后的识别情况或其对胃癌细胞凋亡的影响。并将上述已获取的两种淋巴细胞分别通过尾静脉注入荷 CEA 阳性 KATOⅢ胃癌细胞裸鼠和荷 CEA 阴性 BGC-823 胃癌细胞裸鼠体内,以观察其对荷胃癌裸鼠肿瘤生长情况的影响。 结果 ① 靶淋巴细胞与胃癌细胞共培养 24 h 时,靶淋巴细胞对 KATOⅢ胃癌细胞的识别率为 72.3%,淋巴细胞对 KATOⅢ胃癌细胞的识别能力较强;其对 BGC-823 胃癌细胞识别率为 7.8%,其对 BGC-823 胃癌细胞识别能力较弱。② 当靶淋巴细胞、空载体淋巴细胞分别与 KATOⅢ和 BGC-823 胃癌细胞分别共培养 36 h 时,靶淋巴细胞+KATOⅢ胃癌细胞组的凋亡率明显高于空载体淋巴细胞+KATOⅢ胃癌细胞组(P=0.032),而靶淋巴细胞+BGC-823 胃癌细胞组和空载体淋巴细胞+BGC-823 胃癌细胞组的凋亡率比较差异无统计学意义(P=0.118)。③ 在观察 40 d 内,靶淋巴细胞+KATOⅢ胃癌细胞组的肿瘤体积明显小于空载体淋巴细胞+KATOⅢ胃癌细胞组(F=5.010,P<0.01)和空白对照组(F=7.560,P<0.01);靶淋巴细胞+BGC-823 胃癌细胞组与空载体淋巴细胞+BGC-823 胃癌细胞组间比较差异无统计学意义(F=1.210,P>0.05)。靶淋巴细胞+KATOⅢ胃癌细胞组的肿瘤体积明显小于靶淋巴细胞+BGC-823 胃癌细胞组(F=4.982,P<0.01)。 结论 CEA 阳性靶向性淋巴细胞可特异性促进 CEA 阳性胃癌细胞凋亡,抑制荷 CEA 阳性胃癌细胞裸鼠肿瘤的生长。

Objective To study effect of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) positive targeted lymphocytes on gastric cancer cells in vitro and in vivo. Methods The peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were isolated from the peripheral blood of healthy volunteers. The recombinant vector anti-CEA-scFv-CD3ζ-pcDNA3.0 was transfected into the PBMCs by lipofectamine 2000, by this means, the CEA special lymphocytes were obtained. Meanwhile, the PBMCs transfected with empty plasmid pcDNA3.0 were used as control (empty vector lymphocytes). The different lymphocytes and gastric cancer cells (CEA positive KATOⅢ gastric cancer cells and CEA negative BGC-823 gastric cancer cells) were co-cultured, then the ability to identify the gastric cancer cells and it’s effect on apoptosis of gastric cancer cells were observed at 24 h or 36 h later respectively. The CEA special lymphocytes and empty vector lymphocytes were injected by the tail vein of nude mice bearing gastric cancer cells, then it’s effect on the tumor was observed. Results ① The CEA special lymphocytes could strongly identify the KATOⅢ gastric cancer cells (identification rate was 72.3%), which could weakly identify the BGC-823 gastric cancer cells (identification rate was 7.8%). ② The apoptosis rate of the co-culture of CEA special lymphocytes and KATOⅢ gastric cancer cells was significantly higher than that of the co-culture of empty vector lymphocytes and KATOⅢ gastric cancer cells (P=0.032), which had no significant difference between the co-culture of CEA special lymphocytes and BGC-823 gastric cancer cells and the co-culture of empty vector lymphocytes and BGC-823 gastric cancer cells (P=0.118). ③ The tumor volume of the co-culture of CEA special lymphocytes and KATOⅢ gastric cancer cells was significantly smaller than that of the co-culture of empty vector lymphocytes and KATOⅢ gastric cancer cells (F=5.010, P<0.01) or the co-culture of CEA special lymphocytes and BGC-823 gastric cancer cells (F=4.982, P<0.01), which had no significant difference between the co-culture of CEA special lymphocytes and BGC-823 gastric cancer cells and the co-culture of empty vector lymphocytes and BGC-823 gastric cancer cells (F=1.210, P>0.05). Conclusion CEA special lymphocytes can promote cell apoptosis and inhabit tumor reproduction of CEA positive gastric cancer cells in vitro and in vivo.

关键词: 胃癌; 癌胚抗原; 裸鼠; 淋巴细胞; 单链抗体片段

Key words: gastric cancer; carcinoembryonic antigen; nude mice; T lymphocytes; single chain antibody fragment

引用本文: 徐宏勇, 徐立. 一种特异性靶向性淋巴细胞对荷瘤裸鼠的治疗观察. 中国普外基础与临床杂志, 2018, 25(3): 283-288. doi: 10.7507/1007-9424.201709005 复制

登录后 ,请手动点击刷新查看全文内容。 没有账号,
登录后 ,请手动点击刷新查看图表内容。 没有账号,
1. Ychou M, Duffour J, Kramar A, et al. Clinical significance and prognostic value of CA72-4 compared with CEA and CA19-9 in patients with gastric cancer. Dis Markers, 2000, 16(3-4): 105-110.
2. Baiocchi GL, Marrelli D, Verlato G, et al. Follow-up after gastrectomy for cancer: an appraisal of the Italian research group for gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol, 2014, 21(6): 2005-2011.
3. 顾虎, 李正东, 姜志宝, 等. 早期肿瘤标志物反应与胃癌术后患者预后的相关性. 中国肿瘤外科杂志, 2013, 5(6): 347-351.
4. Nam DH, Lee YK, Park JC, et al. Prognostic value of early postoperative tumor marker response in gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol, 2013, 20(12): 3905-3911.
5. June CH, Bluestone JA, Nadler LM, et al. The B7 and CD28 receptor families. Immunol Today, 1994, 15(7): 321-331.
6. 徐立, 徐宏勇, 樊代明. 胃肠道肿瘤靶向抗癌胚抗原单链抗体与 T 细胞表面受体基因的融合分子构建. 中华消化杂志, 2004, 24(2): 75-77.
7. 徐宏勇, 徐立, 高建宏, 等. 抗癌胚抗原单链抗体的原核表达及对人胃癌的检测. 世界华人消化杂志, 2006, 14(18): 1780-1784.
8. 徐宏勇, 徐立, 高建宏, 等. 嵌合锚定 T 细胞致癌胚抗原阳性胃癌细胞的凋亡效应. 中华医学杂志, 2007, 87(15): 1053-1057.
9. 徐宏勇, 徐立, 李开宗. 肿瘤相关糖蛋白-72 嵌合锚定 T 细胞对肝癌的抑癌效应. 胃肠病学和肝病学杂志, 2014, 23(5): 481-485.
10. Kucera R, Smid D, Topolcan O, et al. Searching for new biomarkers and the use of multivariate analysis in gastric cancer diagnostics. Anticancer Res, 2016, 36(4): 1967-1971.
11. Yazaki PJ, Sherman MA, Shively JE, et al. Humanization of the anti-CEA T84.66 antibody based on crystal structure data. Protein Eng Des Sel, 2004, 17(5): 481-489.
12. Yazaki PJ, Kassa T, Cheung CW, et al. Biodistribution and tumor imaging of an anti-CEA single-chain antibody-albumin fusion protein. Nucl Med Biol, 2008, 35(2): 151-158.
13. Pavoni E, Flego M, Dupuis ML, et al. Selection, affinity maturation, and characterization of a human scFv antibody against CEA protein. BMC Cancer, 2006, 6: 41.
14. Hombach A, Heuser C, Marquardt T, et al. CD4+ T cells engrafted with a recombinant immunoreceptor efficiently lyse target cells in a MHC antigen- and Fas-independent fashion. J Immunol, 2001, 167(2): 1090-1096.
15. Walther W, Stein U. Therapeutic genes for cancer gene therapy. Mol Biotechnol, 1999, 13(1): 21-28.
16. Bethune MT, Joglekar AV. Personalized T cell-mediated cancer immunotherapy: progress and challenges. Curr Opin Biotechnol, 2017, 48: 142-152.
17. Petersen CC, Petersen MS, Agger R, et al. Accumulation in tumor tissue of adoptively transferred T cells: A comparison between intravenous and intraperitoneal injection. J Immunother, 2006, 29(3): 241-249.
18. Virgilio E, Proietti A, D'Urso R, et al. Measuring intragastric tumor markers in gastric cancer patients: a systematic literature review on significance and reliability. Anticancer Res, 2017, 37(6): 2817-2821.
19. Crepeau RL, Ford ML. Challenges and opportunities in targeting the CD28/CTLA-4 pathway in transplantation and autoimmunity. Expert Opin Biol Ther, 2017, 17(8): 1001-1012.
20. Hombach AA, Abken H. Costimulation by chimeric antigen receptors revisited the T cell antitumor response benefits from combined CD28-OX40 signalling. Int J Cancer, 2011, 129(12): 2935-2944.
21. Kofler DM, Chmielewski M, Rappl G, et al. CD28 costimulation Impairs the efficacy of a redirected t-cell antitumor attack in the presence of regulatory T cells which can be overcome by preventing Lck activation. Mol Ther, 2011, 19(4): 760-767.
22. Kakimi K, Karasaki T, Matsushita H, et al. Advances in personalized cancer immunotherapy. Breast Cancer, 2017, 24(1): 16-24.
23. William-Faltaos S, Rouillard D, Lechat P, et al. Cell cycle arrest and apoptosis induced by oxaliplatin (L-OHP) on four human cancer cell lines. Anticancer Res, 2006, 26(3A): 2093-2099.
24. Willemsen RA, Weijtens ME, Ronteltap C, et al. Grafting primary human T lymphocytes with cancer-specific chimeric single chain and two chain TCR. Gene Ther, 2000, 7(16): 1369-1377.
25. Hombach A, Wieczarkowiecz A, Marquardt T, et al. Tumor-specific T cell activation by recombinant immunoreceptors: CD3 zeta signaling and CD28 costimulation are simultaneously required for efficient IL-2 secretion and can be integrated into one combined CD28/CD3 zeta signaling receptor molecule. J Immunol, 2001, 167(11): 6123-6131.