Immunological Analysis of Phase II Glioblastoma Dendritic Cell Vaccine
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Erhart et al. Acta Neuropathologica Communications (2018) 6:135 https://doi.org/10.1186/s40478-018-0621-2 RESEARCH Open Access Immunological analysis of phase II glioblastoma dendritic cell vaccine (Audencel) trial: immune system characteristics influence outcome and Audencel up-regulates Th1-related immunovariables Friedrich Erhart1,2* , Johanna Buchroithner3, René Reitermaier4, Katrin Fischhuber4, Simone Klingenbrunner4, Ido Sloma5, Dror Hibsh5, Renana Kozol5, Sol Efroni5, Gerda Ricken1, Adelheid Wöhrer1, Christine Haberler1, Johannes Hainfellner1, Günther Krumpl4, Thomas Felzmann4, Alexander M. Dohnal6, Christine Marosi7 and Carmen Visus4 Abstract Audencel is a dendritic cell (DC)-based cellular cancer immunotherapy against glioblastoma multiforme (GBM). It is characterized by loading of DCs with autologous whole tumor lysate and in vitro maturation via “danger signals”. The recent phase II “GBM-Vax” trial showed no clinical efficacy for Audencel as assessed with progression-free and overall survival in all patients. Here we present immunological research accompanying the trial with a focus on immune system factors related to outcome and Audencel’s effect on the immune system. Methodologically, peripheral blood samples (from apheresis before Audencel or venipuncture during Audencel) were subjected to functional characterization via enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assays connected with cytokine bead assays (CBAs) as well as phenotypical characterization via flow cytometry and mRNA quantification. GBM tissue samples (from surgery) were subjected to T cell receptor sequencing and immunohistochemistry. As results we found: Patients with favorable pre-existing anti-tumor characteristics lived longer under Audencel than Audencel patients without them. Pre-vaccination blood CD8+ T cell count and ELISPOT Granzyme B production capacity in vitro upon tumor antigen exposure were significantly correlated with overall survival. Despite Audencel’s general failure to induce a significant clinical response, it nevertheless seemed to have an effect on the immune system. For instance, Audencel led to a significant up-regulation of the Th1-related immunovariables ELISPOT IFNγ, the transcription factor T-bet in the blood and ELISPOT IL-2 in a dose-dependent manner upon vaccination. Post-vaccination levels of ELISPOT IFNγ and CD8+ cells in the blood were indicative of a significantly better survival. In summary, Audencel failed to reach an improvement of survival in the recent phase II clinical trial. No clinical efficacy was registered. Our concomitant immunological work presented here indicates that outcome under Audencel was influenced by the (Continued on next page) * Correspondence: [email protected] 1Institute of Neurology, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1097 Vienna, Austria 2Department of Neurosurgery, Medical University of Vienna, Währinger Gürtel 18-20, 1097 Vienna, Austria Full list of author information is available at the end of the article © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. Erhart et al. Acta Neuropathologica Communications (2018) 6:135 Page 2 of 14 (Continued from previous page) state of the immune system. On the other hand, Audencel also seemed to have stimulated the immune system. Overall, these immunological considerations suggest that DC immunotherapy against glioblastoma should be studied further – with the goal of translating an apparent immunological response into a clinical response. Future research should concentrate on investigating augmentation of immune reactions through combination therapies or on developing meaningful biomarkers. Keywords: Glioblastoma multiforme, Dendritic cell, Cancer immunotherapy, Immunology, ELISPOT Introduction after DC vaccination – for DC immunotherapy against Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most frequent and glioblastoma. most aggressive form of brain cancer [30]. Therapeutic This meant finding answers to three questions: (Q1) options are limited. Currently, the standard first line treat- What subgroup of patients based on pre-immunotherapy ment of GBM is maximum surgical resection followed by characteristics of the blood and of the tumor might have a chemotherapy (temozolomide) and radiotherapy. Im- more favorable outcome under Audencel and what are munotherapy is a novel treatment hope currently under hence possible future biomarker candidates? (Q2) Even if investigation [27]. Immunotherapeutic strategies being there was no clinical response of patients to Audencel, did tested in clinical trials include checkpoint inhibitors, pep- it have an effect on the immune system? (Q3) Do immune tide vaccines and Dendritic Cell (DC)-based vaccines [24]. system variable levels post Audencel-application also cor- Given their critical role in guiding anti-cancer immune re- relate with clinical outcome? To answer question (Q1) we actions, deploying DCs against neoplastic cells seems es- assessed immune system variables in apheresis or tumor pecially plausible [20]. A number of DC-based vaccines samples before immunotherapy and correlated them with are currently undergoing clinical development [18]. Feasi- survival. For question (Q2) we studied immune dynamics bility and safety of DC-based immunotherapeutic ap- via measuring blood variables after every cycle of vaccin- proaches have been proven repeatedly [12, 16, 23]. A ation. Question (Q3) was then approached via combining survival benefit could, however, not yet be established in immunovariable levels post Audencel-treatment with sur- clinical trials [18] – despite recent reports of encouraging vival measures. interim results [16]. The Austrian “GBM-Vax” consortium performed a Materials and methods phase II clinical trial with “Audencel”, an autologous Scientific concept and overview DC-based cancer vaccine. Patient DCs were charged with The present work analyses the clinical trial “GBM-Vax” autologous tumor lysis material. DCs were then matured (NCT01213407/EudraCT2009–015979-27) immunologic- in vitro via immunological “danger signals” (Lipopolysac- ally. The study was approved by the Upper-Austrian ethical charides and Interferon gamma, IFNγ) and injected into review committee (TRX2/P-II-018). All patients gave writ- inguinal lymph nodes. This maturation step as well as the ten informed consent also to concomitant immunological fact that loading with autologous whole tumor lysate gen- research. erates a personalized vaccine should in theory mean a Various complementary immunological methods were technically advanced, promising concept [6, 11]. But the applied to blood and tumor tissue of the participating pa- trial based on the Audencel technique failed to show clin- tients: Functional immune-capabilities were measured in ical efficacy (see Buchroithner et al. [2]) when assessing blood samples via an autologous system: the enzyme-linked progression-free and overall survival in all patients. One immunospot (ELISPOT) assay [4, 14]. It quantifies the po- potential reason identified by Buchroithner et al. for tency of tumor-charged DCs to stimulate T cells in vitro via Audencel’s failure is the temporal proximity to the con- registering IFNγ and Granzyme B (GranzB) produced in comitant chemotherapy weakening the immune system. the co-culture. This replicates the expected functional Here, we present the results of immunological re- interplay between DCs and T cells in the patient’slymph search accompanying the trial. We analyzed both, the nodes. Further cytokines released in vitro were measured peripheral blood (from apheresis or venipuncture) as via cytokine bead assays (CBA) of the ELISPOT co-culture well as the tumor tissue (from surgery) through an supernatant. ELISPOT assays were performed from blood array of complementary methods (see Fig. 1a and Mate- before, during and after Audencel treatment. rials and Methods) that characterize the immune sys- In addition, we quantified blood immune cell popula- tem via “immunovariables”. The main intention of the tions at these time-points via flow cytometry of surface here presented investigation was to understand the role markers. Polarization towards a T helper 1 (Th1), T of the immune system – measured before, during and helper 2 (Th2), T helper 17 (Th17) or regulatory T cell Erhart et al. Acta Neuropathologica Communications (2018) 6:135 Page 3 of 14 Fig. 1 Research questions, samples and techniques (Treg) phenotype was measured via qRT-PCR of charac- [3]. In that case, the maximum number of samples with teristic transcription factors [32, 35, 37, 38]. a reliable readout was used for statistics. Tumor tissue was studied via sequencing of tumor-resident T cell receptors (TCR clonotyping) [7]and Blood: CBA immunohistochemistry (IHC) of tumor-resident immune Supernatant from the ELISPOT GranzB plate was col- cells. lected from the co-culture of PBMCs with or without To take technical peculiarities of different methods into exposure to either DCs unloaded or loaded with tumor account, analysis