From 3b28dc5612421e7bb3768c3f8f30955368e278b1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: ndwarshuis Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2021 22:53:14 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] ADD a bunch of discussion stuff --- tex/thesis.tex | 175 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 175 insertions(+) diff --git a/tex/thesis.tex b/tex/thesis.tex index 3b0572b..19aecdb 100644 --- a/tex/thesis.tex +++ b/tex/thesis.tex @@ -1366,6 +1366,181 @@ the responses. \section{discussion} +% TODO this is fluffy +We have developed a T cell expansion system that recapitulates key features of +the in vivo lymph node microenvironment using DMSs functionalized with +activating mAbs. This strategy provided superior expansion with higher number of +naïve/memory and CD4+ T cells compared to state-of-the-art microbead technology +(Figure 2). Other groups have used biomaterials approaches to mimic the in vivo +microenvironment13–15,17,34; however, to our knowledge this is the first system +that specifically drives naïve/memory and CD4+ T cell formation in a scalable, +potentially bioreactor-compatible manufacturing process. + +Memory and naïve T cells have been shown to be important clinically. Compared to +effectors, they have a higher proliferative capacity and are able to engraft for +months; thus they are able to provide long-term immunity with smaller +doses19,35. Indeed, less differentiated T cells have led to greater survival +both in mouse tumor models and human patients20,36,37. Furthermore, clinical +response rates have been positively correlated with T cell expansion, implying +that highly-proliferative naïve and memory T cells are a significant +contributor18,38. Circulating memory T cells have also been found in complete +responders who received CAR T cell therapy39. + +Similarly, CD4 T cells have been shown to play an important role in CAR T cell +immunotherapy. It has been shown that CAR T doses with only CD4 or a mix of CD4 +and CD8 T cells confer greater tumor cytotoxicity than only CD8 T cells22,40. +There are several possible reasons for these observations. First, CD4 T cells +secrete proinflammatory cytokines upon stimulation which may have a synergistic +effect on CD8 T cells. Second, CD4 T cells may be less prone to exhaustion and +may more readily adopt a memory phenotype compared to CD8 T cells22. Third, CD8 +T cells may be more susceptible than CD4 T cells to dual stimulation via the CAR +and endogenous T Cell Receptor (TCR), which could lead to overstimulation, +exhaustion, and apoptosis23. Despite evidence for the importance of CD4 T cells, +more work is required to determine the precise ratios of CD4 and CD8 T cell +subsets to be included in CAR T cell therapy given a disease state. + +% TODO this might be more appropriate for aim 2b where I actually talk about +% the signaling and why this might matter +There are several plausible explanations for the observed phenotypic differences +between beads and DMSs. First, the DMSs are composed of a collagen derivative +(gelatin); collagen has been shown to costimulate activated T cells via α1β1 and +α2β1 integrins, leading to enhanced proliferation, increased IFNγ production, +and upregulated CD25 (IL2Rα) surface expression8,10,11,41,42. Second, there is +evidence that providing a larger contact area for T cell activation provides +greater stimulation16,43; the DMSs have a rougher interface than the 5 µm +magnetic beads, and thus could facilitate these larger contact areas. Third, the +DMSs may allow the T cells to cluster more densely compared to beads, as +evidenced by the large clusters on the outside of the DMSs (Figure 1f) as well +as the significant fraction of DMSs found within their interiors (Supplemental +Figure 2a and b). This may alter the local cytokine environment and trigger +different signaling pathways. Particularly, IL15 and IL21 are secreted by T +cells and known to drive memory phenotype44–46. We noted that the IL15 and IL21 +concentration was higher in a majority of samples when comparing beads and DMSs +across multiple timepoints (Supplemental Figure 18) in addition to many other +cytokines. IL15 and IL21 are added exogenously to T cell cultures to enhance +memory frequency,45,47 and our data here suggest that the DMSs are better at +naturally producing these cytokines and limiting this need. Furthermore, IL15 +unique signals in a trans manner in which IL15 is presented on IL15R to +neighboring cells48. The higher cell density in the DMS cultures would lead to +more of these trans interactions, and therefore upregulate the IL15 pathway and +lead to more memory T cells. + +% TODO this mentions the DOE which is in the next aim +When analyzing all our experiments comprehensively using causal inference, we +found that all three of our responses were significantly increased when +controlling for covariates (Figure 3, Table 2). By extension, this implies that +not only will DMSs lead to higher fold change overall, but also much higher fold +change in absolute numbers of memory and CD4+ T cells. Furthermore, we found +that using a Grex bioreactor is detrimental to fold change and memory percent +while helping CD4+. Since there are multiple consequences to using a Grex +compared to tissue-treated plates, we can only speculate as to why this might be +the case. Firstly, when using a Grex we did not expand the surface area on which +the cells were growing in a comparable way to that of polystyrene plates. In +conjunction with our DOE data {Figure X} which shows that high DMS +concentrations favor CD4+ and don’t favor memory fraction, one possible +explanation is that the T cells spent longer times in highly activating +conditions (since the beads and DMSs would have been at higher per-area +concentrations in the Grex vs polystyrene plates). Furthermore, the simple fact +that the T cells spent more time at high surface densities could simply mean +that the T cells didn’t expands as much due to spacial constraints. This would +all be despite the fact that Grex bioreactors are designed to lead to better T +cell expansion due to their gas-permeable membranes and higher media-loading +capacities. If anything, our data suggests we were using the bioreactor +sub-optimally, and the hypothesized causes for why our T cells did not expand +could be verified with additional experiments varying the starting cell density +and/or using larger bioreactors. + +A key question in the space of cell manufacturing is that of donor variability. +To state this precisely, this is a second order interaction effect that +represents the change in effect of treatment (eg bead vs DMS) given the donor. +While our meta-analysis was relatively large compared to many published +experiments usually seen for technologies at this developmental stage, we have a +limited ability in answering this question. We can control for donor as a +covariate, and indeed our models show that many of the donor characteristics are +strongly associated with each response on average, but these are first order +effects and represent the association of age, gender, demographic, etc given +everything else in the model is held constant. Second order interactions require +that our treatments be relatively balanced and random across each donor, which +is a dubious assumption for our dataset. However, this can easily be solved by +performing more experiments with these restrictions in mind, which will be a +subject of our future work. + +Furthermore, this dataset offers an interesting insight toward novel hypothesis +that might be further investigated. One limitation of our dataset is that we +were unable to investigate the effects of time using a method such as +autoregression, and instead relied on aggregate measures such as the total +amount of a reagent added over the course of the expansion. Further studies +should be performed to investigate the temporal relationship between phenotype, +cytokine concentrations, feed rates, and other measurements which may perturb +cell cultures, as this will be the foundation of modern process control +necessary to have a fully-automated manufacturing system. + +In addition to larger numbers of potent T cells, other advantages of our DMS +approach are that the DMSs are large enough to be filtered (approximately 300 +µm) using standard 40 µm cell filters or similar. If the remaining cells inside +that DMSs are also desired, digestion with dispase or collagenase may be used. +Collagenase D may be selective enough to dissolve the DMSs yet preserve surface +markers which may be important to measure as critical quality attributes CQAs +{Figure X}. Furthermore, our system should be compatible with +large-scale static culture systems such as the G-Rex bioreactor or perfusion +culture systems, which have been previously shown to work well for T cell +expansion12,50,51. The microcarriers used to create the DMSs also have a +regulatory history in human cell therapies that will aid in clinical +translation.; they are already a component in an approved retinal pigment +epithelial cell product for Parkinson’s patients, and are widely available in 30 +countries26. + +It is important to note that all T cell cultures in this study were performed up +to 14 days. Others have demonstrated that potent memory T cells may be obtained +simply by culturing T cells as little as 5 days using traditional beads30. It is +unknown if the naïve/memory phenotype of our DMS system could be further +improved by reducing the culture time, but we can hypothesize that similar +results would be observed given the lower number of doublings in a 5 day +culture. We should also note that we investigated one subtype (\ptmem{}) in +this study. Future work will focus on other memory subtypes such as tissue +resident memory and stem memory T cells, as well as the impact of using the DMS +system on the generation of these subtypes. + +% TODO this sounds sketchy +Another advantage is that the DMS system appears to induce a faster growth rate +of T cells given the same IL2 concentration compared to beads (Supplemental +Figure 8) along with retaining naïve and memory phenotype. This has benefits in +multiple contexts. Firstly, some patients have small starting T cell populations +(such as infants or those who are severely lymphodepleted), and thus require +more population doublings to reach a usable dose. Our data suggests the time to +reach this dose would be reduced, easing scheduling a reducing cost. Secondly, +the allogeneic T cell model would greatly benefit from a system that could +create large numbers of T cells with naïve and memory phenotype. In contrast to +the autologous model which is currently used for Kymriah and Yescarta, +allogeneic T cell therapy would reduce cost by spreading manufacturing expenses +across many doses for multiple patients52. Since it is economically advantageous +to grow as many T cells as possible in one batch in the allogeneic model +(reduced start up and harvesting costs, fewer required cell donations), the DMSs +offer an advantage over current technology. + +% TODO this is already stated in the innovation section +It should be noted that while we demonstrate a method providing superior +performance compared to bead-based expansion, the cell manufacturing field would +tremendously benefit from simply having an alternative to state-of-the-art +methods. The patents for bead-based expansion are owned by few companies and +licensed accordingly; having an alternative would provide more competition in +the market, reducing costs and improving access for academic researchers and +manufacturing companies. + +% TODO this isn't relevent to this aim but should be said somewhere +Finally, while we have demonstrated the DMS system in the context of CAR T +cells, this method can theoretically be applied to any T cell immunotherapy +which responds to anti-CD3/CD28 mAb and cytokine stimulation. These include +tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), virus-specific T cells (VSTs), T cells +engineered to express γδTCR (TEGs), γδ T cells, T cells with transduced-TCR, and +CAR-TCR T cells53–58. Similar to CD19-CARs used in liquid tumors, these T cell +immunotherapies would similarly benefit from the increased proliferative +capacity, metabolic fitness, migration, and engraftment potential characteristic +of naïve and memory phenotypes59–61. Indeed, since these T cell immunotherapies +are activated and expanded with either soluble mAbs or bead-immobilized mAbs, +our system will likely serve as a drop-in substitution to provide these +benefits. + \chapter{aim 2}\label{aim2} \section{introduction}