FIX acronyms and colagenase fig
This commit is contained in:
parent
8828ee366c
commit
50e03ef8a4
File diff suppressed because one or more lines are too long
Before Width: | Height: | Size: 195 KiB After Width: | Height: | Size: 146 KiB |
481
tex/thesis.tex
481
tex/thesis.tex
|
@ -13,8 +13,6 @@
|
|||
\usepackage{graphicx}
|
||||
\usepackage{subcaption}
|
||||
\usepackage{nth}
|
||||
\usepackage{hyperref} % must be before cleveref
|
||||
\usepackage[capitalize]{cleveref}
|
||||
\usepackage[version=4]{mhchem}
|
||||
\usepackage{pgfgantt}
|
||||
\usepackage{setspace}
|
||||
|
@ -22,6 +20,8 @@
|
|||
\usepackage{tocloft}
|
||||
\usepackage{epigraph}
|
||||
\usepackage{threeparttable}
|
||||
\usepackage{hyperref} % must be before cleveref
|
||||
\usepackage[capitalize]{cleveref}
|
||||
|
||||
\hypersetup{
|
||||
colorlinks=true,
|
||||
|
@ -164,10 +164,6 @@
|
|||
\newacronym{pdms}{PDMS}{polydimethylsiloxane}
|
||||
\newacronym{dc}{DC}{dendritic cell}
|
||||
\newacronym{il}{IL}{interleukin}
|
||||
\newacronym{il2}{IL2}{interleukin 2}
|
||||
\newacronym{il15}{IL15}{interleukin 15}
|
||||
\newacronym{il15r}{IL15R}{interleukin 15 receptor}
|
||||
\newacronym{rhil2}{rhIL2}{recombinant human interleukin 2}
|
||||
\newacronym{apc}{APC}{antigen presenting cell}
|
||||
\newacronym{mhc}{MHC}{major histocompatibility complex}
|
||||
\newacronym{elisa}{ELISA}{enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay}
|
||||
|
@ -215,6 +211,7 @@
|
|||
\newacronym{moi}{MOI}{multiplicity of infection}
|
||||
\newacronym{ifng}{IFN$\upgamma$}{interferon-$\upgamma$}
|
||||
\newacronym{tnfa}{TNF$\upalpha$}{tumor necrosis factor-$\upalpha$}
|
||||
\newacronym{gmcsf}{GM-CSF}{granulocyte-macrophage colony stimulating factor}
|
||||
\newacronym{sql}{SQL}{structured query language}
|
||||
\newacronym{fcs}{FCS}{flow cytometry standard}
|
||||
\newacronym{ivis}{IVIS}{in vivo imaging system}
|
||||
|
@ -357,9 +354,13 @@
|
|||
|
||||
% so I don't need to worry about abbreviating all the different interleukins
|
||||
\newcommand{\il}[1]{\gls{il}-#1}
|
||||
\newcommand{\ilr}[1]{\gls{il}-#1R}
|
||||
|
||||
% ...and this one is just plain annoying
|
||||
\newcommand{\ilXVra}[1]{\ilr{15}$\upalpha$}
|
||||
|
||||
% DOE stuff I don't feel like typing ad-nauseam
|
||||
\newcommand{\pilII}{\gls{il2} concentration}
|
||||
\newcommand{\pilII}{\il{2} concentration}
|
||||
\newcommand{\pdms}{\gls{dms} concentration}
|
||||
\newcommand{\pmab}{functional \gls{mab} surface density}
|
||||
\newcommand{\rmemh}{total \ptmemh{} cells}
|
||||
|
@ -621,7 +622,7 @@ tetramers (Expamer)\cite{Roddie2019,Dwarshuis2017,Wang2016, Piscopo2017,
|
|||
present in the secondary lymphoid organs where T cells expand \invivo{}.
|
||||
Typically, T cells are activated under close cell-cell contact, which allows for
|
||||
efficient autocrine/paracrine signaling via growth-stimulating cytokines such as
|
||||
\gls{il2}. Additionally, the lymphoid tissues are comprised of \gls{ecm}
|
||||
\il{2}. Additionally, the lymphoid tissues are comprised of \gls{ecm}
|
||||
components such as collagen and stromal cells, which provide signals to
|
||||
upregulate proliferation, cytokine production, and pro-survival
|
||||
pathways\cite{Gendron2003, Ohtani2008, Boisvert2007, Ben-Horin2004}.
|
||||
|
@ -645,18 +646,17 @@ discovering and validating novel \glspl{cqa} and \glspl{cpp} in the space of T
|
|||
cell manufacturing are required to reproducibly manufacture these subtypes and
|
||||
ensure low-cost and safe products with maximal effectiveness in the clinic.
|
||||
|
||||
This dissertation describes a novel \acrlong{dms}-based method derived from
|
||||
porous microcarriers functionalized with \acd{3} and \acd{28} \glspl{mab} for
|
||||
use in T cell expansion cultures. Microcarriers have historically been used
|
||||
throughout the bioprocess industry for adherent cultures such as \gls{cho} cells
|
||||
but not with suspension cells such as T cells\cite{Heathman2015, Sart2011}. The
|
||||
microcarriers chosen to make the \gls{dms} in this work have a microporous
|
||||
structure that allows T cells to grow inside and along the surface, providing
|
||||
ample cell-cell contact for enhanced autocrine and paracrine signaling.
|
||||
Furthermore, the 3D surface of the carriers provides a larger contact area for T
|
||||
cells to interact with the \glspl{mab} relative to beads; this may better
|
||||
emulate the large contact surface area that occurs between T cells and
|
||||
\glspl{dc}.
|
||||
This dissertation describes a novel \acrlong{dms}-based method for expanding T
|
||||
cells using porous microcarriers functionalized with \acd{3} and \acd{28}
|
||||
\glspl{mab}. Microcarriers have historically been used in the bioprocess
|
||||
industry for adherent cultures such as \gls{cho} cells but not with suspension
|
||||
cells such as T cells\cite{Heathman2015, Sart2011}. The microcarriers chosen to
|
||||
make the \gls{dms} in this work have a microporous structure that allows T cells
|
||||
to grow inside and along the surface, providing ample cell-cell contact for
|
||||
enhanced autocrine and paracrine signaling. Furthermore, the 3D surface of the
|
||||
carriers provides a larger contact area for T cells to interact with the
|
||||
\glspl{mab} relative to beads; this may better emulate the large contact surface
|
||||
area that occurs between T cells and \glspl{dc}.
|
||||
|
||||
\section*{hypothesis}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -754,13 +754,12 @@ space of cell manufacturing, examples of \glspl{cqa} include markers on the
|
|||
surface of cells and readouts from functional assays such as killing assays. In
|
||||
general, these are poorly understood if they exist at all.
|
||||
|
||||
%% TODO IL2 use here is wonky
|
||||
\glspl{cpp} are parameters which may be tuned and varied to control the outcome
|
||||
of process and the quality of the final product. Examples include the type of
|
||||
media used and the amount of \il{2} added. While these can be easy to control,
|
||||
the effect they have on the final outcome is generally unknown. Once \glspl{cpp}
|
||||
are known, they can be optimized to ensure that costs are minimized and potency
|
||||
of the cellular product is maximized.
|
||||
\glspl{cpp} are parameters which may be tuned to control the outcome of process
|
||||
and the quality of the final product. Examples include the type of media used
|
||||
and the amount of \il{2} added. While these can be easy to control, the effect
|
||||
they have on the final outcome is generally unknown. Once \glspl{cpp} are known,
|
||||
they can be optimized to ensure that costs are minimized and potency of the
|
||||
cellular product is maximized.
|
||||
|
||||
The topic of discovering novel \glspl{cpp} and \glspl{cqa} in the context of
|
||||
this work are discussed further in \cref{sec:background_doe} and
|
||||
|
@ -778,7 +777,7 @@ One of the first successful T cell-based immunotherapies against cancer is
|
|||
\glspl{til}\cite{Rosenberg2015}. This method works by excising tumor fragments
|
||||
from a patient, allowing the tumor-reactive lymphocytes to expand \exvivo{} from
|
||||
within these fragments, and then administered these lymphocytes back to the
|
||||
patient along with a high dose of \il{2}\cite{Rosenberg1988}. In particular,
|
||||
patient along with a high dose of \\il{2}\cite{Rosenberg1988}. In particular,
|
||||
\gls{til} therapy has shown robust results in treating
|
||||
melanoma\cite{Rosenberg2011}, although \glspl{til} have been found in other
|
||||
solid tumors such as gastointestinal, cervical, lung, and
|
||||
|
@ -1004,8 +1003,8 @@ There are many ways to activate T cells \invitro{}, but the simplest and most
|
|||
common is to use \glspl{mab} that cross-link CD3 and CD28, which supply Signal 1
|
||||
and Signal 2 without the need for antigen (which also means all T cells are
|
||||
activated and not just a few specific clones). Additional signals may be
|
||||
supplied in the form of cytokines (eg \il{2}, \il{7}, or \il{15}) or feeder
|
||||
cells\cite{Forget2014}.
|
||||
supplied in the form of cytokines (eg \il{2}, \il{7}, or \il{15}) or
|
||||
feeder cells\cite{Forget2014}.
|
||||
|
||||
As this is a critical unit operation in the manufacturing of T cell therapies, a
|
||||
number of commercial technologies exist to activate T cells\cite{Wang2016,
|
||||
|
@ -1148,15 +1147,14 @@ memory T cells. Its role in the work of this dissertation is the subject of
|
|||
further exploration in \cref{aim2b}.
|
||||
|
||||
Functionally, mice lacking the gene for either \il{15}\cite{Kennedy2000} or its
|
||||
high affinity receptor \il{15R$\upalpha$}\cite{Lodolce1998} are generally
|
||||
high affinity receptor \ilXVra{}\cite{Lodolce1998} are generally
|
||||
healthy but show a deficit in memory CD8 T cells, thus underscoring this
|
||||
cytokine's importance in producing memory T cells for immunotherapies. T
|
||||
cells themselves express \il{15} and all of its receptor
|
||||
components\cite{MirandaCarus2005}. Additionally, blocking \il{15} itself or
|
||||
\il{15R$\upalpha$} \invitro{} has been shown to inhibit homeostatic
|
||||
\ilXVra{} \invitro{} has been shown to inhibit homeostatic
|
||||
proliferation of resting human T cells\cite{MirandaCarus2005}.
|
||||
|
||||
% ACRO fix the il2R and IL15R stuff
|
||||
\il{15} has been puzzling historically because it shares almost the same pathway
|
||||
as \il{2} yet has different functions\cite{Stonier2010, Osinalde2014, Giri1994,
|
||||
Giri1995}. In particular, both cytokines bond with heterotrimeric receptors
|
||||
|
@ -1164,33 +1162,32 @@ which share the common $\upgamma$ subchain (CD132) as well as the \il{2}
|
|||
$\upbeta$ receptor (CD122). The difference is the third subchain which is either
|
||||
the \il{2} $\upalpha$ receptor (CD25) or the \il{15} $\upalpha$ chain
|
||||
respectively, both of which have high affinity for their respective ligands. The
|
||||
\il{2R$\upalpha$} chain itself does not have any signaling capacity, and
|
||||
therefore all the signaling resulting from \il{2} is mediated thought the
|
||||
$\upbeta$ and $\upgamma$ chains (namely via JAK1 and JAK3, which leads to STAT5
|
||||
activation, which leads to T cell activation). \il{15R$\upalpha$} itself has
|
||||
some innate signaling capacity, but this is poorly characterized in
|
||||
lymphocytes\cite{Stonier2010}. Thus there is a significant overlap between the
|
||||
functions of \il{2} and \il{15} due to their receptors sharing the $\upbeta$ and
|
||||
$\upgamma$ chains, and perhaps the main driver of their differential functions
|
||||
it the half life of each respective receptor\cite{Osinalde2014}.
|
||||
\ilXVra{} chain itself does not have any signaling capacity, and therefore all
|
||||
the signaling resulting from \il{2} is mediated thought the $\upbeta$ and
|
||||
$\upgamma$ chains (namely via JAK1 and JAK3, which leads to STAT5 activation,
|
||||
which leads to T cell activation). \ilXVra{} itself has some innate signaling
|
||||
capacity, but this is poorly characterized in lymphocytes\cite{Stonier2010}.
|
||||
Thus there is a significant overlap between the functions of \il{2} and \il{15}
|
||||
due to their receptors sharing the $\upbeta$ and $\upgamma$ chains, and perhaps
|
||||
the main driver of their differential functions it the half life of each
|
||||
respective receptor\cite{Osinalde2014}.
|
||||
|
||||
Where \il{15} is unique is that many (or possibly most) of its functions derive
|
||||
from being membrane-bound to its receptor\cite{Stonier2010}. Particularly,
|
||||
\il{15R$\upalpha$} binds to soluble \il{15} which produces a complex that can
|
||||
transmit signals to close neighboring cells (so called \textit{trans}
|
||||
presentation). This has been demonstrated in adoptive cell models, where T cells
|
||||
lacking \il{15R$\upalpha$} were able to generate memory T cells and proliferate
|
||||
only when other cells were present which expressed
|
||||
\il{15R$\upalpha$}\cite{Burkett2003, Schluns2004}. The implication of this
|
||||
mechanism is that cells expression \il{15R$\upalpha$} either need to express
|
||||
\il{15} themselves or be near other cells expressing \il{15}, and other cells in
|
||||
proximity require the $\upbeta$ and $\upgamma$ chains to receive the signal. In
|
||||
addition to \textit{trans} presentation, \il{15} may also work in a \textit{cis}
|
||||
manner, where \il{15R$\upalpha$}/\il{15} complexes may bind to the $\upbeta$ and
|
||||
$\upgamma$ chains on the same cell, assuming each subchain is expressed and
|
||||
soluble \il{15} is available\cite{Olsen2007}. Finally, \il{15R$\upalpha$} itself
|
||||
can exist in soluble form, which can bind to \il{15} and signal to cells which
|
||||
are not adjacent to the source independent of the \textit{cis/trans} mechanisms
|
||||
\ilXVra{} binds to soluble \il{15} which produces a complex that can transmit
|
||||
signals to close neighboring cells (so called \textit{trans} presentation). This
|
||||
has been demonstrated in adoptive cell models, where T cells lacking \ilXVra{}
|
||||
were able to generate memory T cells and proliferate only when other cells were
|
||||
present which expressed \ilXVra{} \cite{Burkett2003, Schluns2004}. The
|
||||
implication of this mechanism is that cells expression \ilXVra{} either need to
|
||||
express \il{15} themselves or be near other cells expressing \il{15}, and other
|
||||
cells in proximity require the $\upbeta$ and $\upgamma$ chains to receive the
|
||||
signal. In addition to \textit{trans} presentation, \il{15} may also work in a
|
||||
\textit{cis} manner, where \ilXVra{}/\il{15} complexes may bind to the $\upbeta$
|
||||
and $\upgamma$ chains on the same cell, assuming each subchain is expressed and
|
||||
soluble \il{15} is available\cite{Olsen2007}. Finally, \ilXVra{} itself can
|
||||
exist in soluble form, which can bind to \il{15} and signal to cells which are
|
||||
not adjacent to the source independent of the \textit{cis/trans} mechanisms
|
||||
already described\cite{Budagian2004}.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Overview of Design of Experiments}\label{sec:background_doe}
|
||||
|
@ -1492,7 +1489,7 @@ attachment using an \product{\anti{\gls{igg}} \gls{elisa} kit}{Abcam}{157719}.
|
|||
Fully functionalized \glspl{dms} were washed in sterile \gls{pbs} analogous to
|
||||
the previous washing step to remove excess \gls{stp}.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Microcarrier properties}
|
||||
\label{tab:carrier_props}
|
||||
\input{../tables/carrier_properties.tex}
|
||||
|
@ -1561,15 +1558,16 @@ otherwise noted. Initial cell density was \SIrange{2e6}{2.5e6}{\cell\per\ml} to
|
|||
in a 96 well plate with \SI{300}{\ul} volume. Serum-free media was either
|
||||
\product{OpTmizer}{\thermo}{A1048501} or
|
||||
\product{TexMACS}{\miltenyi}{170-076-307} supplemented with
|
||||
\SIrange{100}{400}{\IU\per\ml} \product{\gls{rhil2}}{Peprotech}{200-02} unless
|
||||
otherwise noted. Cell cultures were expanded for \SI{14}{\day} as counted from
|
||||
the time of initial seeding and activation. Cell counts and viability were
|
||||
assessed using \product{trypan blue}{\thermo}{T10282} or
|
||||
\product{\gls{aopi}}{Nexcelom Bioscience}{CS2-0106-5} and a \product{Countess
|
||||
Automated Cell Counter}{Thermo Fisher}{Countess 3 FL}. Media was added to
|
||||
cultures every \SIrange{2}{3}{\day} depending on media color or a
|
||||
\SI{300}{\mg\per\deci\liter} minimum glucose threshold. Media glucose was
|
||||
measured using a \product{GlucCell glucose meter}{Chemglass}{CLS-1322-02}.
|
||||
\SIrange{100}{400}{\IU\per\ml} \product{recombinant human
|
||||
\il{2}}{Peprotech}{200-02} unless otherwise noted. Cell cultures were expanded
|
||||
for \SI{14}{\day} as counted from the time of initial seeding and activation.
|
||||
Cell counts and viability were assessed using \product{trypan
|
||||
blue}{\thermo}{T10282} or \product{\gls{aopi}}{Nexcelom
|
||||
Bioscience}{CS2-0106-5} and a \product{Countess Automated Cell Counter}{Thermo
|
||||
Fisher}{Countess 3 FL}. Media was added to cultures every \SIrange{2}{3}{\day}
|
||||
depending on media color or a \SI{300}{\mg\per\deci\liter} minimum glucose
|
||||
threshold. Media glucose was measured using a \product{GlucCell glucose
|
||||
meter}{Chemglass}{CLS-1322-02}.
|
||||
|
||||
Cells on the \glspl{dms} were visualized by adding \SI{0.5}{\ul}
|
||||
\product{\gls{stppe}}{\bl}{405204} and \SI{2}{ul}
|
||||
|
@ -1870,7 +1868,7 @@ was set to the maximum value of the standard curve for that cytokine. Any value
|
|||
that was under-range (`OOR <' in output spreadsheet) was set to zero. All values
|
||||
that were extrapolated from the standard curve were left unchanged.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Luminex panel}
|
||||
\label{tab:luminex_panel}
|
||||
\input{../tables/luminex_panel.tex}
|
||||
|
@ -1884,7 +1882,7 @@ datafiles into a \gls{sql} database (\cref{sec:appendix_meta}).
|
|||
|
||||
The data files to be aggregated included Microsoft Excel files which held
|
||||
timeseries measurements for cell cultures (eg cell counts, viability, glucose,
|
||||
\gls{il2} added, media added, and media removed), \gls{fcs} files for cellular
|
||||
\il{2} added, media added, and media removed), \gls{fcs} files for cellular
|
||||
phenotypes, and FlowJo files which held gating parameters and statistics based
|
||||
on the \gls{fcs} files. Additional information which was held in electronic lab
|
||||
notebooks (eg OneNote files) was not easily parsable, and thus this data was
|
||||
|
@ -1930,7 +1928,7 @@ context of pure error). Significance was evaluated at $\upalpha$ = 0.05.
|
|||
\label{fig:gating_strategy}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Antibodies used for flow cytometry}
|
||||
\label{tab:flow_mabs}
|
||||
\input{../tables/flow_mabs.tex}
|
||||
|
@ -2244,9 +2242,9 @@ traditional beads, and significantly greater expansion after \SI{12}{\day} of
|
|||
culture (\cref{fig:dms_expansion_bead}). We also observed no T cell expansion
|
||||
using \glspl{dms} coated with an isotype control mAb compared to \glspl{dms}
|
||||
coated with \acd{3}/\acd{28} \glspl{mab} (\cref{fig:dms_expansion_isotype}),
|
||||
confirming specificity of the expansion method. Given that \il{2} does not lead
|
||||
to expansion on its own, we know that the expansion of the T cells shown here is
|
||||
due to the \acd{3} and \acd{28} \glspl{mab}\cite{Waysbort2013}.
|
||||
confirming specificity of the expansion method. Given that \il{2} does not
|
||||
lead to expansion on its own, we know that the expansion of the T cells shown
|
||||
here is due to the \acd{3} and \acd{28} \glspl{mab}\cite{Waysbort2013}.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
|
||||
\begingroup
|
||||
|
@ -2314,7 +2312,7 @@ by lowering apoptosis.
|
|||
\label{fig:dms_inside}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Regression for fraction of cells in \acrshortpl{dms} at day 14}
|
||||
\label{tab:inside_regression}
|
||||
\input{../tables/inside_fraction_regression.tex}
|
||||
|
@ -2473,7 +2471,7 @@ showing that migration was likely independent of \gls{car} transduction.
|
|||
transduced or untransduced T cells stained with \gls{ptnl}.}
|
||||
All data is from T cells expanded for \SI{14}{\day}.
|
||||
}
|
||||
\label{fig:car_production}
|
||||
\label{fig:car_cd19}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
|
||||
|
@ -2494,7 +2492,7 @@ showing that migration was likely independent of \gls{car} transduction.
|
|||
\subcap{fig:car_degran_migration}{Endpoint plot for transmigration assay
|
||||
with \gls{anova}.} All data is from T cells expanded for \SI{14}{\day}.
|
||||
}
|
||||
\label{fig:car_production}
|
||||
\label{fig:car_degran}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
In addition to CD19 \gls{car} T cells, we also demonstrated that the \gls{dms}
|
||||
|
@ -2579,8 +2577,8 @@ We also quantified the cytokines released during the \gls{grex} expansion using
|
|||
Luminex. We noted that in nearly all cases, the \gls{dms}-expanded T cells
|
||||
released higher concentrations of cytokines compared to beads
|
||||
(\cref{fig:grex_luminex}), including higher concentrations of pro-inflammatory
|
||||
cytokines such as GM-CSF, \gls{ifng}, and \gls{tnfa}. This demonstrates that
|
||||
\glspl{dms} could lead to more robust activation.
|
||||
cytokines such as \gls{gmcsf}, \gls{ifng}, and \gls{tnfa}. This demonstrates
|
||||
that \glspl{dms} could lead to more robust activation.
|
||||
|
||||
Taken together, these data suggest that \gls{dms} also lead to robust expansion
|
||||
in \gls{grex} bioreactors, although more optimization may be necessary to
|
||||
|
@ -2603,7 +2601,6 @@ seen in tissue-culture plates.
|
|||
\label{fig:nonstick}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
% DISCUSSION alude to this figure
|
||||
We asked if \glspl{mab} from the \glspl{dms} detached from the \gls{dms} surface
|
||||
and could be detected on the final T cell product. This test is important for
|
||||
clinical translation as any residual \glspl{mab} on T cells injected into the
|
||||
|
@ -2634,8 +2631,8 @@ included in this dataset. Obviously the principle treatment parameter was
|
|||
either beads or \glspl{dms}. We also included ``bioreactor'' which was a
|
||||
categorical variable for growing the T cells in a \gls{grex} bioreactor or
|
||||
polystyrene plates, ``feed criteria'' which represented the criteria used to
|
||||
feed the cells (media color or a glucose meter), ``IL2 Feed Conc.'' as a
|
||||
continuous parameter for the concentration of IL2 added each feed cycle, and
|
||||
feed the cells (media color or a glucose meter), ``\il{2} Feed Conc.'' as a
|
||||
continuous parameter for the concentration of \il{2} added each feed cycle, and
|
||||
``CD19-CAR Transduced'' representing if the cells were lentivirally transduced
|
||||
or not. Unfortunately, many of these parameters correlated with each other
|
||||
despite the large size of our dataset, so the only two parameters for which
|
||||
|
@ -2653,28 +2650,28 @@ In addition to these treatment parameters, we also included covariates to
|
|||
improve the precision of our model. Among these were donor parameters including
|
||||
age, \gls{bmi}, demographic, and gender, as well as the initial viability and
|
||||
CD4:CD8 ratio of the cryopreserved cell lots used in the experiments
|
||||
(\cref{tab:meta_donors}). We also included the age (in days) of IL2, growth
|
||||
media, and thaw media; for IL2 this was the time elapsed since reconstitution,
|
||||
and for the others it was the elapsed time since the manufacturing date
|
||||
according to the vendor. Each experiment was performed by one of three
|
||||
operators, so this was included as a three-level categorical parameter. Lastly,
|
||||
some of our experiments were sampled longitudinally, so we included a boolean
|
||||
categorical to represented this modification as removing conditioned media as
|
||||
the cell are expanding could disrupt signaling pathways.
|
||||
(\cref{tab:meta_donors}). We also included the age (in days) of \il{2}, growth
|
||||
media, and thaw media; for \il{2} this was the time elapsed since
|
||||
reconstitution, and for the others it was the elapsed time since the
|
||||
manufacturing date according to the vendor. Each experiment was performed by one
|
||||
of three operators, so this was included as a three-level categorical parameter.
|
||||
Lastly, some of our experiments were sampled longitudinally, so we included a
|
||||
boolean categorical to represented this modification as removing conditioned
|
||||
media as the cell are expanding could disrupt signaling pathways.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Causal inference on treatment variables}
|
||||
\label{tab:ci_treat}
|
||||
\input{../tables/causal_inference_treat.tex}
|
||||
\end{table}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Causal inference on all variables}
|
||||
\label{tab:ci_controlled}
|
||||
\input{../tables/causal_inference_control.tex}
|
||||
\end{table}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Causal inference on all variables (single donor)}
|
||||
\label{tab:ci_single}
|
||||
\input{../tables/causal_inference_single.tex}
|
||||
|
@ -2745,7 +2742,6 @@ extreme in other donors.
|
|||
|
||||
\section{Discussion}
|
||||
|
||||
% DISCUSSION this is fluffy
|
||||
We have developed a method for activating T cells which leads to superior
|
||||
expansion with higher number of naïve/memory and CD4+ T cells compared to
|
||||
state-of-the-art microbead technology (\cref{fig:dms_exp}). Other groups have
|
||||
|
@ -2828,34 +2824,6 @@ 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.
|
||||
|
||||
% 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
|
||||
% beads\cite{Ghassemi2018}. 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.
|
||||
|
||||
% DISCUSSION 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 patients\cite{Harrison2019}. 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.
|
||||
|
||||
The \gls{dms} system could be used as a drop in replacement for beads in many of
|
||||
current allogeneic therapies. Indeed, given its higher potential for expansion
|
||||
(\cref{fig:dms_exp,tab:ci_controlled}), it may work in cases where the beads
|
||||
|
@ -3145,11 +3113,11 @@ depicted using a Venn diagram from the \inlinecode{venn} R package.
|
|||
\subsection{DMSs Grow T Cells With Lower IL2 Concentrations}
|
||||
|
||||
Prior to the main experiments in this aim, we assessed the effect of lowering
|
||||
the \gls{il2} concentration on the T cells grown with either bead or \gls{dms}.
|
||||
the \il{2} concentration on the T cells grown with either bead or \gls{dms}.
|
||||
One of our hypotheses for the \gls{dms} system was that higher cell density
|
||||
would enhance cross-talk between T cells. Since \gls{il2} is secreted by
|
||||
would enhance cross-talk between T cells. Since \il{2} is secreted by
|
||||
activated T cells themselves, T cells in the \gls{dms} system may need less or
|
||||
no \gls{il2} if this is true.
|
||||
no \il{2} if this is true.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
|
||||
\begingroup
|
||||
|
@ -3162,40 +3130,40 @@ no \gls{il2} if this is true.
|
|||
|
||||
\endgroup
|
||||
\caption[T Cells Grown at Varying IL2 Concentrations]
|
||||
{\glspl{dms} grow T cells effectively at lower IL2 concentrations.
|
||||
{\glspl{dms} grow T cells effectively at lower \il{2} concentrations.
|
||||
\subcap{fig:il2_mod_timecourse}{Longitudinal cell counts of T cells grown
|
||||
with either bead or \glspl{dms} using varying IL2 concentrations.}
|
||||
with either bead or \glspl{dms} using varying \il{2} concentrations.}
|
||||
Day 14 counts of either \subcap{fig:il2_mod_total}{total cells} or
|
||||
\subcap{fig:il2_mod_mem}{\ptmem{} cells} plotted against \gls{il2}
|
||||
\subcap{fig:il2_mod_mem}{\ptmem{} cells} plotted against \il{2}
|
||||
concentration.
|
||||
\subcap{fig:il2_mod_flow}{Flow cytometry plots of the \ptmem{} gated
|
||||
populations at day 14 of culture for each \gls{il2} concentration.}
|
||||
populations at day 14 of culture for each \il{2} concentration.}
|
||||
}
|
||||
\label{fig:il2_mod}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
We varied the concentration of \gls{il2} from \SIrange{0}{100}{\IU\per\ml} and
|
||||
We varied the concentration of \il{2} from \SIrange{0}{100}{\IU\per\ml} and
|
||||
expanded T cells as described in \cref{sec:tcellculture}. T cells grown with
|
||||
either method expanded robustly as \gls{il2} concentration was increased
|
||||
either method expanded robustly as \il{2} concentration was increased
|
||||
(\cref{fig:il2_mod_timecourse}). Surprisingly, neither the bead or the \gls{dms}
|
||||
group expanded at all with \SI{0}{\IU\per\ml} \gls{il2}. When examining the
|
||||
group expanded at all with \SI{0}{\IU\per\ml} \il{2}. When examining the
|
||||
endpoint fold change after \SI{14}{\day}, we observed that the difference
|
||||
between the bead and \gls{dms} appears to be greater at lower \gls{il2}
|
||||
between the bead and \gls{dms} appears to be greater at lower \il{2}
|
||||
concentrations (\cref{fig:il2_mod_total}). Furthermore, the same trend can be
|
||||
seen when only examining the \ptmem{} cell expansion at day 14
|
||||
(\cref{fig:il2_mod_mem}). In this case, the \ptmemp{} of the T cells seemed to
|
||||
be relatively close at higher \gls{il2} concentrations, but separated further at
|
||||
be relatively close at higher \il{2} concentrations, but separated further at
|
||||
lower concentrations (\cref{fig:il2_mod_flow})
|
||||
|
||||
Taken together, these data do not support the hypothesis that the \gls{dms}
|
||||
system does not need \gls{il2} at all; however, it appears to have a modest
|
||||
advantage at lower \gls{il2} concentrations compared to beads. For this reason,
|
||||
we decided to investigate the lower range of \gls{il2} concentrations starting
|
||||
system does not need \il{2} at all; however, it appears to have a modest
|
||||
advantage at lower \il{2} concentrations compared to beads. For this reason,
|
||||
we decided to investigate the lower range of \il{2} concentrations starting
|
||||
at \SI{10}{\IU\per\ml} in the remainder of this aim.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{DOE Shows Optimal Conditions for Potent T Cells}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h]
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht]
|
||||
\centering
|
||||
\begin{threeparttable}
|
||||
\caption{DOE Runs}
|
||||
|
@ -3263,42 +3231,41 @@ were shown in \cref{tab:doe_runs}.
|
|||
\endgroup
|
||||
\caption[T Cell Optimization Through \acrshortpl{doe}]
|
||||
{\gls{doe} methodology reveals optimal conditions for expanding T cell
|
||||
subsets. Responses vs IL2 concentration, \gls{dms} concentration, and
|
||||
subsets. Responses vs \il{2} concentration, \gls{dms} concentration, and
|
||||
functional \gls{mab} percentage are shown for
|
||||
\subcap{fig:doe_responses_mem}{total \ptmem{} T cells},
|
||||
\subcap{fig:doe_responses_cd4}{total \pth{} T cells},
|
||||
\subcap{fig:doe_responses_mem4}{total \ptmemh{} T cells}, and
|
||||
\subcap{fig:doe_responses_ratio}{ratio of CD4 and CD8 T cells in the
|
||||
\ptmem{} compartment}. Each point represents one run.
|
||||
}
|
||||
\ptmem{} compartment}. Each point represents one run. }
|
||||
\label{fig:doe_responses}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Regression for total \ptmem{} cells (first order)}
|
||||
\label{tab:doe_mem1.tex}
|
||||
\input{../tables/doe_mem1.tex}
|
||||
\end{table}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Regression for total \ptmem{} cells (third order)}
|
||||
\label{tab:doe_mem2.tex}
|
||||
\input{../tables/doe_mem2.tex}
|
||||
\end{table}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Regression for total \pth{} cells}
|
||||
\label{tab:doe_cd4.tex}
|
||||
\input{../tables/doe_cd4.tex}
|
||||
\end{table}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Regression for total \ptmemh{} cells}
|
||||
\label{tab:doe_mem4.tex}
|
||||
\input{../tables/doe_mem4.tex}
|
||||
\end{table}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Regression for \ptmem{} CD4:CD8 ratio}
|
||||
\label{tab:doe_ratio.tex}
|
||||
\input{../tables/doe_ratio.tex}
|
||||
|
@ -3318,9 +3285,6 @@ confidence to the location of this second order feature. The remainder of the
|
|||
responses showed mostly linear relationships in all parameter cases
|
||||
(\cref{fig:doe_responses_cd4,fig:doe_responses_mem4,fig:doe_responses_ratio}).
|
||||
|
||||
% RESULT it seems arbitrary that I went straight to a third order model, the real
|
||||
% reason is because it seemed weird that a second order model didn't find
|
||||
% anything to be significant
|
||||
We performed linear regression on the three input parameters as well as a binary
|
||||
parameter representing if a given run came from the first or second \gls{doe}
|
||||
(called ``dataset''). Starting with the total \ptmem{} cells response, we fit a
|
||||
|
@ -3408,7 +3372,7 @@ that a set of bead based runs which were run in parallel, in agreement with the
|
|||
luminex data obtained previously in the \gls{grex} system (these data were
|
||||
collected in plates) (\cref{fig:grex_luminex}).
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption[Machine Learning Model Results]
|
||||
{Results for \gls{ml} modeling using process parameters (PP) with
|
||||
only \gls{nmr} on day 4 (N4), only \gls{nmr} on day 6 (N6), only secretome
|
||||
|
@ -3445,11 +3409,12 @@ other \gls{ml} methods exhibited exceedingly variable \gls{loocv}
|
|||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
The top-performing technique, \gls{sr}, showed that the median aggregated
|
||||
predictions for \rmemh{} \rmemk{} increases when IL2 concentration, IL15, and
|
||||
IL2R increase while IL17a decreases in conjunction with other features. These
|
||||
patterns combined with low values of \pdms{} and GM-CSF uniquely characterized
|
||||
maximum \rmemk{}. Meanwhile, higher glycine but lower IL13 in combination with
|
||||
others showed maximum \rmemh{} predictions (\cref{fig:sr_omics}).
|
||||
predictions for \rmemh{} \rmemk{} increases when \il{2} concentration, \il{15},
|
||||
and \ilr{2} increase while \il{17a} decreases in conjunction with other
|
||||
features. These patterns combined with low values of \pdms{} and \gls{gmcsf}
|
||||
uniquely characterized maximum \rmemk{}. Meanwhile, higher glycine but lower
|
||||
\il{13} in combination with others showed maximum \rmemh{} predictions
|
||||
(\cref{fig:sr_omics}).
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
|
||||
\begingroup
|
||||
|
@ -3474,16 +3439,16 @@ Selecting \gls{cpp} and \glspl{cqa} candidates consistently for T cell memory is
|
|||
desired. Here, \gls{tnfa} was found in consensus across all seven \gls{ml}
|
||||
methods for predicting \rratio{} when considering features with the highest
|
||||
importance scores across models (\cref{fig:mod_flower_48r}). Other features,
|
||||
IL2R, IL4, IL17a, and \pdms{}, were commonly selected in $\ge$ 5 \gls{ml}
|
||||
methods (\cref{fig:mod_flower_48r}). When restricting the models only to include
|
||||
metabolome, formate was the sole predictor shared by all.
|
||||
\ilr{2}, \il{4}, \il{17a}, and \pdms{}, were commonly selected in $\ge$ 5
|
||||
\gls{ml} methods (\cref{fig:mod_flower_48r}). When restricting the models only
|
||||
to include metabolome, formate was the sole predictor shared by all.
|
||||
|
||||
When performing similar analysis on \rmemh{}, no species for either secretome or
|
||||
metabolome was shared by all models (\cref{fig:mod_flower_cd4}). These models
|
||||
also had worse fits compared to those for \rratio{} (\cref{tab:mod_results}).
|
||||
For the secretome, IL4, IL17a, and IL2R were agreed upon by $\ge$ 5 models. For
|
||||
the metabolome, formate once again was shared by $\ge$ 5 models as well as
|
||||
lactate.
|
||||
For the secretome, \il{4}, \il{17a}, and \ilr{2} were agreed upon by $\ge$ 5
|
||||
models. For the metabolome, formate once again was shared by $\ge$ 5 models as
|
||||
well as lactate.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
|
||||
\begingroup
|
||||
|
@ -3497,28 +3462,26 @@ lactate.
|
|||
\endgroup
|
||||
\caption[NMR Day 4 Correlations]
|
||||
{\gls{nmr} features at day 4 are strongly correlated with each other and the
|
||||
response variables. Highly correlated relationships are shown for
|
||||
response. Highly correlated relationships are shown for
|
||||
\subcap{fig:nmr_cors_lactate}{lactate},
|
||||
\subcap{fig:nmr_cors_formate}{formate}, and
|
||||
\subcap{fig:nmr_cors_glucose}{glucose}. Blue and blue connections indicate
|
||||
\subcap{fig:nmr_cors_glucose}{glucose}. Blue and red connections indicate
|
||||
positive and negative correlations respectively. The threshold for
|
||||
visualizing connections in all cases was 0.8.
|
||||
\subcap{fig:nmr_cors_matrix}{The correlation matrix for all predictive
|
||||
features and the total \ptmemh{} response.}
|
||||
}
|
||||
\subcap{fig:nmr_cors_matrix}{Correlation matrix for all features and total
|
||||
\ptmemh{} yield.} }
|
||||
\label{fig:nmr_cors}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
We also asked if day 4 \gls{nmr} features could predict \ptmemh{}; these models
|
||||
generally fit well despite being 2 days earlier in the process
|
||||
(\cref{fig:nmr_cors})\footnote{for anyone wondering why we don't have the
|
||||
matching secretome data for day 4, blame UPS for losing our samples}. Lactate
|
||||
and formate correlated with each other and with \rmemh{}. Furthermore, lactate
|
||||
positively correlated with \pdms{} and negatively correlated with glucose
|
||||
(\cref{fig:nmr_cors_lactate}). Formate also had the same correlation patterns
|
||||
(\cref{fig:nmr_cors_formate}). Glucose was only negatively correlated with
|
||||
formate and lactate (\cref{fig:nmr_cors_glucose}). Together, these data suggest
|
||||
that lactate, formate, \pdms{}, and \rmemh{} are fundamentally linked.
|
||||
(\cref{fig:nmr_cors}). Lactate and formate correlated with each other and
|
||||
\rmemh{}. Furthermore, lactate positively correlated with \pdms{} and negatively
|
||||
correlated with glucose (\cref{fig:nmr_cors_lactate}). Formate also had the same
|
||||
correlation patterns (\cref{fig:nmr_cors_formate}). Glucose was only negatively
|
||||
correlated with formate and lactate (\cref{fig:nmr_cors_glucose}). Together,
|
||||
these data suggest that lactate, formate, \pdms{}, and \rmemh{} are
|
||||
fundamentally linked.
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Discussion}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -3545,53 +3508,55 @@ maximizing model validity for model-based decision making, optimizing processing
|
|||
parameters to maximize yield, and developing emulators for online optimization
|
||||
and human understanding\cite{Kotancheka}.
|
||||
|
||||
An in-depth characterization of potential \gls{dms} based T cell \glspl{cqa}
|
||||
An in-depth characterization of potential \gls{dms}-based T cell \glspl{cqa}
|
||||
includes a list of cytokine and \gls{nmr} features from media samples that are
|
||||
crucial in many aspects of T cell fate decisions and effector functions of
|
||||
immune cells. Cytokine features slightly improved prediction and dominated the
|
||||
ranking of important features and variable combinations when modeling together
|
||||
with \gls{nmr} media analysis and process parameters (\cref{fig:mod_flower}).
|
||||
crucial to fate and effector functions of immune cells. Cytokine features
|
||||
slightly improved prediction and dominated the ranking of important features and
|
||||
variable combinations when modeling together with \gls{nmr} media analysis and
|
||||
process parameters (\cref{fig:mod_flower}).
|
||||
|
||||
Predictive cytokine features such as \gls{tnfa}, IL2R, IL4, IL17a, IL13, and
|
||||
IL15 were biologically assessed in terms of their known functions and activities
|
||||
associated with T cells. T helper cells secrete more cytokines than T cytotoxic
|
||||
cells, as per their main functions, and activated T cells secrete more cytokines
|
||||
than resting T cells. It is possible that some cytokines simply reflect the
|
||||
\rratio{} and the activation degree by proxy proliferation. However, the exact
|
||||
ratio of expected cytokine abundance is less clear and depends on the subtypes
|
||||
present, thus examination of each relevant cytokine is needed.
|
||||
Predictive cytokine features such as \gls{tnfa}, \ilr{2}, \il{4}, \il{17a},
|
||||
\il{13}, and \il{15} were biologically assessed in terms of their known
|
||||
functions and activities associated with T cells. T helper cells secrete more
|
||||
cytokines than T cytotoxic cells, as per their main functions, and activated T
|
||||
cells secrete more cytokines than resting T cells. It is possible that some
|
||||
cytokines simply reflect the \rratio{} and the activation degree by proxy
|
||||
proliferation. However, the exact ratio of expected cytokine abundance is less
|
||||
clear and depends on the subtypes present, thus examination of each relevant
|
||||
cytokine is needed.
|
||||
|
||||
IL2R is secreted by activated T cells and binds to IL2, acting as a sink to
|
||||
dampen its effect on T cells\cite{Witkowska2005}. Since IL2R was more abundant
|
||||
than IL2 in solution, this might reduce the overall effect of IL2, which could
|
||||
be further investigated by blocking IL2R with an antibody. In T cells, TNF can
|
||||
increase IL2R, proliferation, and cytokine production\cite{Mehta2018}. It may
|
||||
also induce apoptosis depending on concentration and alter the CD4:CD8
|
||||
ratio\cite{Vudattu2005}. Given that TNF has both a soluble and membrane-bound
|
||||
form, this may either increase or decrease CD4:CD8 ratio and/or memory T cells
|
||||
depending on the ratio of the membrane to soluble TNF\cite{Mehta2018}. Since
|
||||
only soluble TNF was measured, membrane TNF is needed to understand its impact
|
||||
on both CD4:CD8 ratio and memory T cells. Furthermore, IL13 is known to be
|
||||
critical for \gls{th2} response and therefore could be secreted if there are
|
||||
significant \glspl{th2} already present in the starting
|
||||
population\cite{Wong2011}. This cytokine has limited signaling in T cells and is
|
||||
thought to be more of an effector than a differentiation
|
||||
cytokine\cite{Junttila2018}. It might be emerging here due to an initially large
|
||||
number of \glspl{th2} or because \glspl{th2} were preferentially expanded;
|
||||
indeed, IL4, also found important, is the canonical cytokine that induces
|
||||
\gls{th2} differentiation (\cref{fig:mod_flower}). The role of these cytokines
|
||||
could be investigated by quantifying \glspl{th1}, \glspl{th2}, or \glspl{th17}
|
||||
both in the starting population and longitudinally. Similar to IL13, IL17 is an
|
||||
effector cytokine produced by \glspl{th17}\cite{Amatya2017} thus may reflect the
|
||||
number of \glspl{th17} in the population. GM-CSF has been linked with activated
|
||||
T cells, specifically \glspl{th17}, but it is not clear if this cytokine is
|
||||
inducing differential expansion of CD8+ T cells or if it is simply a covariate
|
||||
with another cytokine inducing this expansion\cite{Becher2016}. Finally, IL15
|
||||
has been shown to be essential for memory signaling and effective in skewing
|
||||
\gls{car} T cells toward \glspl{tscm} when using membrane-bound IL15Ra and
|
||||
IL15R\cite{Hurton2016}. Its high predictive behavior goes with its ability to
|
||||
induce large numbers of memory T cells by functioning in an autocrine/paracrine
|
||||
manner and could be explored by blocking either the cytokine or its receptor.
|
||||
\ilr{2} is secreted by activated T cells and binds to \il{2}, acting as a sink
|
||||
to dampen its effect on T cells\cite{Witkowska2005}. Since \ilr{2} was more
|
||||
abundant than \il{2} in solution, this might reduce the overall effect of
|
||||
\il{2}, which could be further investigated by blocking \ilr{2} with an
|
||||
antibody. In T cells, \gls{tnfa} can increase \ilr{2}, proliferation, and
|
||||
cytokine production\cite{Mehta2018}. It may also induce apoptosis depending on
|
||||
concentration and alter the CD4:CD8 ratio\cite{Vudattu2005}. Given that TNF has
|
||||
both a soluble and membrane-bound form, this may either increase or decrease
|
||||
CD4:CD8 ratio and/or memory T cells depending on the ratio of the membrane to
|
||||
soluble TNF\cite{Mehta2018}. Since only soluble \gls{tnfa} was measured,
|
||||
membrane \gls{tnfa} is needed to understand its impact on both CD4:CD8 ratio and
|
||||
memory T cells. Furthermore, \il{13} is known to be critical for \gls{th2}
|
||||
response and therefore could be secreted if there are significant \glspl{th2}
|
||||
already present in the starting population\cite{Wong2011}. This cytokine has
|
||||
limited signaling in T cells and is thought to be more of an effector than a
|
||||
differentiation cytokine\cite{Junttila2018}. It might be emerging here due to an
|
||||
initially large number of \glspl{th2} or because \glspl{th2} were preferentially
|
||||
expanded; indeed, \il{4}, also found important, is the canonical cytokine that
|
||||
induces \gls{th2} differentiation (\cref{fig:mod_flower}). The role of these
|
||||
cytokines could be investigated by quantifying \glspl{th1}, \glspl{th2}, or
|
||||
\glspl{th17} both in the starting population and longitudinally. Similar to
|
||||
\il{13}, \il{17} is an effector cytokine produced by
|
||||
\glspl{th17}\cite{Amatya2017} thus may reflect the number of \glspl{th17} in the
|
||||
population. \gls{gmcsf} has been linked with activated T cells, specifically
|
||||
\glspl{th17}, but it is not clear if this cytokine is inducing differential
|
||||
expansion of CD8+ T cells or if it is simply a covariate with another cytokine
|
||||
inducing this expansion\cite{Becher2016}. Finally, \il{15} has been shown to be
|
||||
essential for memory signaling and effective in skewing \gls{car} T cells toward
|
||||
\glspl{tscm} when using membrane-bound \ilXVra{} and \ilr{15}\cite{Hurton2016}.
|
||||
Its high predictive behavior goes with its ability to induce large numbers of
|
||||
memory T cells by functioning in an autocrine/paracrine manner and could be
|
||||
explored by blocking either the cytokine or its receptor.
|
||||
|
||||
Moreover, many predictive metabolites found here are consistent with metabolic
|
||||
activity associated with T cell activation and differentiation, yet it is not
|
||||
|
@ -3715,16 +3680,16 @@ analyzing via a \bd{} Accuri flow cytometer.
|
|||
|
||||
\subsection{IL15 Blocking Experiments}
|
||||
|
||||
To block the \gls{il15r}, we supplemented T cell
|
||||
To block the \ilXVra{}, we supplemented T cell
|
||||
cultures activated with \gls{dms} with either
|
||||
\product{\anti{\gls{il15r}}}{RnD}{AF247} or \product{\gls{igg} isotype
|
||||
\product{\anti{\ilXVra{}}}{RnD}{AF247} or \product{\gls{igg} isotype
|
||||
control}{RnD}{AB-108-C} at the indicated timepoints and concentrations. T
|
||||
cells were grown as otherwise described in \cref{sec:tcellculture} with the
|
||||
exception that volumes were split by $\frac{1}{3}$ to keep the culture volume
|
||||
constant and minimize the amount of \gls{mab} required.
|
||||
|
||||
To block soluble \gls{il15}, we supplemented analogously with
|
||||
\product{\anti{\gls{il15}}}{RnD}{EEP0419081} or \product{\gls{igg} isotype
|
||||
To block soluble \il{15}, we supplemented analogously with
|
||||
\product{\anti{\il{15}}}{RnD}{EEP0419081} or \product{\gls{igg} isotype
|
||||
control}{\bl}{B236633}.
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Results}
|
||||
|
@ -3737,14 +3702,13 @@ phenotype of T cells. While adding \glspl{dms} was simple, the easiest way to
|
|||
remove \glspl{dms} was to use enzymatic digestion. Collagenase is an enzyme that
|
||||
specifically targets collagen proteins. Since our \glspl{dms} are composed of
|
||||
porcine-derived collagen, this enzyme should target the \gls{dms} while sparing
|
||||
the cells along with any markers we wish to analyze. We tested this specific
|
||||
hypothesis using either \gls{colb}, \gls{cold} or \gls{hbss}, and stained the
|
||||
cells using a typical marker panel to assess if any of the markers were cleaved
|
||||
off by the enzyme which would bias our final readout. The marker histograms in
|
||||
the \gls{cold} group were similar to that of the buffer group, while the
|
||||
\gls{colb} group visibly lowered CD62L and CD4, indicating partial enzymatic
|
||||
cleavage (\cref{fig:collagenase_fx}). Based on this result, we used \gls{cold}
|
||||
moving forward.
|
||||
the cells along with any markers we wish to analyze. We tested this hypothesis
|
||||
using \gls{colb}, \gls{cold} or \gls{hbss}, and then analyzed the cells via flow
|
||||
cytometry to assess if the enzymes would cleave off markers of interest. The
|
||||
histograms in the \gls{cold} group were similar to that of the buffer group,
|
||||
while the \gls{colb} group visibly lowered CD62L and CD4, indicating partial
|
||||
enzymatic cleavage (\cref{fig:collagenase_fx}). Based on this result, we used
|
||||
\gls{cold} moving forward.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
|
||||
\begingroup
|
||||
|
@ -3754,7 +3718,7 @@ moving forward.
|
|||
\endgroup
|
||||
\caption[Effects of Collagenase Treatment on T cells]
|
||||
{T cells treated with either \gls{colb}, \gls{cold}, or buffer and then
|
||||
stained for various surface markers and analyzing via flow cytometry.}
|
||||
stained for various surface markers and analyzed via flow cytometry.}
|
||||
\label{fig:collagenase_fx}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -3859,13 +3823,12 @@ much higher fraction of \gls{tscm} cells compared to the \textit{no change}
|
|||
group, which had more ``transitory \gls{tscm} cells.'' The majority of these
|
||||
cells were \cdp{8} cells. When analyzing the same data using \gls{tsne}, we
|
||||
observed a higher fraction of CD27 and lower fraction of CD45RO in the
|
||||
\textit{removed} group (\cref{fig:spade_tsne_all}). When manually gating on the
|
||||
CD27+CD45RO- population, we see there is higher density in the \textit{removed}
|
||||
group, indicating more of this population (\cref{fig:spade_tsne_stem}).
|
||||
Together, these data indicate that removing \glspl{dms} at lower timepoints
|
||||
leads to higher expansion, lower \pthp{}, and higher fraction of
|
||||
lower differentiated T cells such as \gls{tscm}, and adding \gls{dms} does the
|
||||
inverse.
|
||||
\textit{removed} group (\cref{fig:spade_tsne_all}). Manually gating on the
|
||||
CD27+CD45RO- population more cells with this phenotype in the \textit{removed}
|
||||
group (\cref{fig:spade_tsne_stem}). Together, these data indicate that removing
|
||||
\glspl{dms} at lower timepoints leads to higher expansion, lower \pthp{}, and
|
||||
higher fraction of lower differentiated T cells such as \gls{tscm}, and adding
|
||||
\gls{dms} does the inverse.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Blocking Integrin Does Not Alter Expansion or Phenotype}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -3900,7 +3863,7 @@ cells through \gls{a2b1} and \gls{a2b2}, causing them to grow better in the
|
|||
\label{fig:integrin_1}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Regression for day 14 phenotype shown in \cref{fig:integrin_1}}
|
||||
\label{tab:integrin_1_reg}
|
||||
\input{../tables/integrin_1_reg.tex}
|
||||
|
@ -3938,7 +3901,7 @@ significantly different between any of the groups
|
|||
\label{fig:integrin_2}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Regression for day 14 phenotype shown in \cref{fig:integrin_2}}
|
||||
\label{tab:integrin_2_reg}
|
||||
\input{../tables/integrin_2_reg.tex}
|
||||
|
@ -3959,14 +3922,14 @@ is not due to signaling through \gls{a2b1} or \gls{a2b2}.
|
|||
|
||||
\subsection{Blocking IL15 Does Not Alter Expansion or Phenotype}
|
||||
|
||||
\gls{il15} is a cytokine responsible for memory T cell survival and maintenance.
|
||||
\il{15} is a cytokine responsible for memory T cell survival and maintenance.
|
||||
Furthermore, previous experiments showed that it is secreted to a much greater
|
||||
extend in \gls{dms} compared to bead cultures (\cref{fig:doe_luminex}). One of
|
||||
our driving hypotheses in designing the \gls{dms} system was that the higher
|
||||
cell density would lead to greater local signaling. Since we observed higher
|
||||
\ptmemp{} across many conditions, we hypothesized that \gls{il15} may be
|
||||
\ptmemp{} across many conditions, we hypothesized that \il{15} may be
|
||||
responsible for this, and further that the unique \textit{cis/trans} activity of
|
||||
\gls{il15} may be more active in the \gls{dms} system due to higher cell
|
||||
\il{15} may be more active in the \gls{dms} system due to higher cell
|
||||
density.
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
|
||||
|
@ -3980,7 +3943,7 @@ density.
|
|||
|
||||
\endgroup
|
||||
\caption[IL15 Blocking I]
|
||||
{Blocking IL15Ra does not lead to differences in memory or growth.
|
||||
{Blocking \ilXVra{} does not lead to differences in memory or growth.
|
||||
\subcap{fig:il15_1_overview}{Experimental overview}.
|
||||
Longitudinal measurements of
|
||||
\subcap{fig:il15_1_fc}{fold change} and
|
||||
|
@ -3992,7 +3955,7 @@ density.
|
|||
\label{fig:il15_1}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
We first tested this hypothesis by blocking \gls{il15r} with either a specific
|
||||
We first tested this hypothesis by blocking \ilXVra{} with either a specific
|
||||
\gls{mab} or an \gls{igg} isotype control at
|
||||
\SI{5}{\ug\per\ml}\cite{MirandaCarus2005}. There was no difference in the
|
||||
expansion rate of blocked or unblocked cells (this experiment also had
|
||||
|
@ -4015,7 +3978,7 @@ the markers, and by extension showing no difference in phenotype
|
|||
|
||||
\endgroup
|
||||
\caption[IL15 Blocking II]
|
||||
{Blocking soluble IL15 does not lead to differences in memory or growth.
|
||||
{Blocking soluble \il{15} does not lead to differences in memory or growth.
|
||||
\subcap{fig:il15_2_overview}{Experimental overview}.
|
||||
Longitudinal measurements of
|
||||
\subcap{fig:il15_2_fc}{fold change} and
|
||||
|
@ -4027,16 +3990,16 @@ the markers, and by extension showing no difference in phenotype
|
|||
\label{fig:il15_2}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
We next tried blocking soluble \gls{il15} itself using either a \gls{mab} or an
|
||||
\gls{igg} isotype control. Anti-\gls{il15} or \gls{igg} isotype control was
|
||||
We next tried blocking soluble \il{15} itself using either a \gls{mab} or an
|
||||
\gls{igg} isotype control. Anti-\il{15} or \gls{igg} isotype control was
|
||||
added at \SI{5}{\ug\per\ml}, which according to \cref{fig:doe_luminex} was in
|
||||
excess of the \gls{il15} concentration seen in past experiments by over
|
||||
excess of the \il{15} concentration seen in past experiments by over
|
||||
\num{20000} times. Similarly, there was no difference between fold change,
|
||||
viability, or marker histograms between any of these markers, showing that
|
||||
blocking \gls{il15} led to no difference in growth or phenotype.
|
||||
blocking \il{15} led to no difference in growth or phenotype.
|
||||
|
||||
In summary, this data did not support the hypothesis that the \gls{dms} platform
|
||||
gains its advantages via the \gls{il15} pathway.
|
||||
gains its advantages via the \il{15} pathway.
|
||||
|
||||
\section{Discussion}
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -4091,7 +4054,7 @@ and survival, and thus adding them along with with the \glspl{mab} could enhance
|
|||
T cell expansion\cite{Aoudjit2000, Gendron2003, Boisvert2007}.
|
||||
|
||||
We also failed to uphold our hypothesis that the \gls{dms} system gains its
|
||||
advantage via \gls{il15} signaling. There could be multiple reasons for why
|
||||
advantage via \il{15} signaling. There could be multiple reasons for why
|
||||
blocking either \il{15} itself or its receptor would not influence the response
|
||||
at all. First, it could be that \il{15} is not important in our system, which is
|
||||
not likely given the importance of \il{15} in T cells expansion and particularly
|
||||
|
@ -4108,8 +4071,8 @@ degree). The way to test this would be to simply titrate increasing
|
|||
concentrations of \gls{mab} (which we did not do in our case because the
|
||||
\gls{mab} was already very expensive in the concentrations employed for our
|
||||
experiment). Fourth, blocking the soluble protein may not have worked because
|
||||
\il{15} may have been secreted and immediately captured via \il{15R$\upalpha$}
|
||||
either by the cell that secreted it or by a neighboring cell.
|
||||
\il{15} may have been secreted and immediately captured via \ilXVra{} either by
|
||||
the cell that secreted it or by a neighboring cell.
|
||||
|
||||
Regardless of whether or not \il{15} is important for the overall mechanism that
|
||||
differentiates the \glspl{dms} from the beads, adding \il{15} or its receptor
|
||||
|
@ -4191,7 +4154,7 @@ using the Mantel-Cox test to assess significance between survival groups.
|
|||
\label{fig:mouse_dosing_overview}
|
||||
\end{figure*}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h] \centering
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht] \centering
|
||||
\caption{Cells injected for \acrshort{car} T cell \invivo{} dose study}
|
||||
\label{tab:mouse_dosing_results}
|
||||
\input{../tables/mouse_dose_car.tex}
|
||||
|
@ -4551,9 +4514,9 @@ expansion rate. This agrees with other data we obtained in \cref{aim2a} and with
|
|||
what others have generally reported about signal strength and T cell
|
||||
differentiation\cite{Gattinoni2012, Lozza2008, Lanzavecchia2005, Corse2011}. We
|
||||
did not find any mechanistic relationship between either integrin signaling or
|
||||
\gls{il15} signaling. In the case of the former, it may be more likely that the
|
||||
\il{15} signaling. In the case of the former, it may be more likely that the
|
||||
\glspl{dms} surfaces are saturated to the point of sterically hindering any
|
||||
integrin interactions with the collagen surface. In the case of \gls{il15}, more
|
||||
integrin interactions with the collagen surface. In the case of \il{15}, more
|
||||
experiments likely need to be done in order to plausibly rule out this mechanism
|
||||
and/or determine if it is involved at all.
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -4800,8 +4763,8 @@ ligands (in addition to integrin-binding domains and \il{15} complexes as
|
|||
described at the end of \cref{aim2b}) that could have profound effects on the
|
||||
expansion and quality of T cells which may be utilized. The simplest next step
|
||||
is to simply vary the ratio of \acd{3} and \acd{28} signal. Another obvious
|
||||
example is to attach \il{15}/\il{15R$\upalpha$} complexes to the surface to
|
||||
mimic \textit{trans} presentation from other cell types\cite{Stonier2010}. Other
|
||||
example is to attach \il{15}/\ilXVra{} complexes to the surface to mimic
|
||||
\textit{trans} presentation from other cell types\cite{Stonier2010}. Other
|
||||
adhesion ligands or peptides such as GFOGER could be used to stimulate T cells
|
||||
and provide more motility on the \glspl{dms}\cite{Stephan2014}. Finally, viral
|
||||
delivery systems could theoretically be attached to the \gls{dms}, greatly
|
||||
|
@ -4867,7 +4830,7 @@ The code is available here: \url{https://github.gatech.edu/ndwarshuis3/mdma}.
|
|||
|
||||
\chapter{META ANALYSIS DONORS}\label{sec:appendix_donors}
|
||||
|
||||
\begin{table}[!h]
|
||||
\begin{table}[!ht]
|
||||
\caption{Donors used in meta-analysis}
|
||||
\begin{subtable}[t]{\textwidth} \centering
|
||||
\caption{characteristics}
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue