Search

Simple Summary Immunotherapy has revolutionized the management of cancer by improving outcomes of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Recently, programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), was identified as a target for TNBC and several preclinical and clinical trials are currently focusing on combinatorial treatments of immunomodulatory mAbs with chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or other mAbs. Here, we tested in in vitro models novel combinations of immunomodulatory mAbs on TNBC cell lines and on cardiomyocytes, in comparison with the mAbs approved by FDA for cancer therapy, in order to identify at early stages the more potent anti-cancer combinations endowed with low or no cardiotoxic side effects. Abstract Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a highly aggressive subtype of breast cancer characterized by a higher mortality rate among breast cancer subtypes. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors are used in clinics to treat a subgroup of TNBC patients, but other targeted therapies are urgently needed. Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), involved in tumor immune escape, was recently identified as a target for TNBC; accordingly, the anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody (mAb), atezolizumab, has been approved by FDA in combination with Paclitaxel for the therapy of metastatic TNBC. Here, we tested novel combinations of fully human immunomodulatory mAbs, including anti-PD-L1 mAbs generated in our laboratory and atezolizumab, on TNBC and other tumor cell lines. We evaluated their anti-tumor efficacy when used as single agents or in combinatorial treatments with anti-CTLA-4 mAbs in in vitro co-cultures of hPBMCs with tumor cells, by measuring tumor cell lysis and IL-2 and IFNγ cytokines secretion by lymphocytes. In parallel, by using co-cultures of hPBMCs and cardiomyocytes, we analyzed the potential cardiotoxic adverse side effects of the same antibody treatments by measuring the cardiac cell lysis and the secretion of pro-inflammatory cytokines. We identified novel combinations of immunomodulatory mAbs endowed with more potent anti-cancer activity on TNBC and lower cardiotoxic side effects than the combination of atezolizumab and ipilimumab.

Simple Summary Oncolytic viruses are emerging immunotherapeutics in cancer treatments. The conflicting role of innate immunity in the antitumor activity of oncolytic viruses is still a matter of debate. The STING-dependent DNA sensing axis is considered detrimental for viral replication and cancer cell clearance. Accordingly, we observed that STING loss in tumor cells was associated with improved lytic potential by a herpes-based oncolytic virus. However, STING-knockout cancer cells infected with the oncolytic virus showed impaired immunogenicity, as immunogenic cell death was improperly triggered. In agreement with these observations, STING-knockout tumors raised in a murine syngeneic model were more resistant to a combined treatment of the oncolytic virus with PD-1 blockade. The present study demonstrates the antitumor benefit of antiviral immunity and sheds lights on the mechanisms of immune resistance to oncovirotherapy exerted by STING-loss in tumor cells. Abstract The dichotomic contribution of cancer cell lysis and tumor immunogenicity is considered essential for effective oncovirotherapy, suggesting that the innate antiviral immune response is a hurdle for efficacy of oncolytic viruses. However, emerging evidence is resizing this view. By sensing cytosolic DNA, the cyclic GMP-AMP synthase (cGAS) and stimulator of interferon genes (STING) axis can both counteract viral spread and contribute to the elicitation of adaptive immunity via type I interferon responses. In this paper, we analyzed the tumor-resident function of Sting-mediated DNA sensing in a combined approach of oncovirotherapy and PD-1 immune checkpoint blockade, in an immunocompetent murine model. While supporting increased lytic potential by oncolytic HER2-retargeted HSV-1 in vitro and in vivo, Sting-knockout tumors showed molecular signatures of an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. These signatures were correspondingly associated with ineffectiveness of the combination therapy in a model of established tumors. Results suggest that the impairment in antiviral response of Sting-knockout tumors, while favoring viral replication, is not able to elicit an adequate immunotherapeutic effect, due to lack of immunogenic cell death and the inability of Sting-knockout cancer cells to promote anti-tumor adaptive immune responses. Accordingly, we propose that antiviral, tumor-resident Sting provides fundamental contributions to immunotherapeutic efficacy of oncolytic viruses.

The cytotoxic T lymphocyte-antigen 4 (CTLA-4) has been considered an IC exclusively expressed on T cells, where it counteracts the co-stimulatory CD28 receptor, by competing for its binding to CD-80 and CD-86. We recently found that it is expressed also on tumor and NK cells, suggesting other possible unknown roles of CTLA-4. To shed light on these novel aspects of CTLA-4, we used Ipilimumab, the first FDA approved human antibody targeting CTLA-4, in parallel studies with two novel human mAbs we isolated by using an efficient phage display selection strategy on live activated lymphocytes and purified mouse and human CTLA-4. The selection for cross-reactive mAbs was guaranteed by a high throughput sequencing to identify the sequences commonly enriched by two parallel pannings on human and mouse CTLA-4. Two isolated antibodies were found to bind with high affinity to both human and mouse CTLA-4 and lymphocytes, showing nanomolar or sub-nanomolar Kd values. They were able to kill Treg cells by ADCC, and to activate both human and mouse PBMCs, by strongly increasing cytokines secretion. Interestingly, they activated NK cells, exhibited cytotoxicity against cancer cells by inducing ADCC and inhibited tumor cell growth by affecting CTLA-4 downstream pathways in a similar fashion to CD-80 and CD-86 ligands and differently from Ipilimumab. Moreover, the novel mAbs showed a reduced ability to interfere in the binding of CD-80 ligands to CTLA-4 on T cells with respect to Ipilimumab, suggesting that they could allow for anti-tumor effects without the irAEs associated with the potent antagonistic activity of Ipilimumab.