posted on 2023-03-31, 22:40authored byRaghuveer Ranganathan, Peishun Shou, Sarah Ahn, Chuang Sun, John West, Barbara Savoldo, Gianpietro Dotti
Recurrent tumor cells in vivo
Funding
Lymphoma Research Foundation Clinical Investigator Career Development
History
ARTICLE ABSTRACT
CD19-redirected chimeric antigen receptor (CAR.CD19) T cells promote clinical responses in patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas and chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). However, patients showing sustained clinical responses after CAR.CD19-T treatment show increased infection risk due to compromised B-lymphocyte recovery. Mature B cell–derived malignancies express monoclonal immunoglobulins bearing either κ- or λ-light chains. We initially constructed CAR-T targeting the κ-light-chain (CAR.κ) and established a clinical study with it. After optimizing the CAR molecule, cells developed CAR-T targeting the λ-light chain (CAR.λ) and we explored their antitumor activity.
Using Igλ+ lymphoma cell lines and patient-derived Igλ+ CLL cells, we evaluated the in vitro tumor cytotoxicity and cytokine profiles of CAR.λ. We also assessed the in vivo efficacy of CAR.λ in xenograft Igλ+ lymphoma models including a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) of mantle cell lymphoma, and the effects of λ- or κ-light chain–specific CAR-T on normal B lymphocytes in a humanized murine model.
CAR.λ demonstrated antitumor effects against Igλ+ lymphoma cells and patient-derived CLL cells in vitro, and in vivo in xenograft and PDX Igλ+ lymphoma murine models. Antitumor activity of CAR.λ was superimposable to CAR.CD19. Furthermore, we demonstrated in the humanized murine model that λ- or κ-light chain–specific CAR-T cells only depleted the corresponding targeted light chain–expressing normal B cells, while sparing the reciprocal light chain carrying B cells.
Adoptive transfer of CAR.λ and CAR.κ-T cells represents a useful and alternative modality to CAR.CD19-T cells in treating mature B-cell malignancies with minimal impact on humoral immunity.See related commentary by Jain and Locke, p. 5736