ADD (some) future directions
This commit is contained in:
parent
86868ec140
commit
c5d80389e6
|
@ -68,6 +68,7 @@
|
|||
\newacronym{pbs}{PBS}{phosphate buffered saline}
|
||||
\newacronym{bca}{BCA}{bicinchoninic acid assay}
|
||||
\newacronym{bsa}{BSA}{bovine serum albumin}
|
||||
\newacronym{hsa}{HSA}{human serum albumin}
|
||||
\newacronym{stp}{STP}{streptavidin}
|
||||
\newacronym{stppe}{STP-PE}{streptavidin-phycoerythrin}
|
||||
\newacronym{snb}{SNB}{sulfo-nhs-biotin}
|
||||
|
@ -3476,15 +3477,64 @@ In \cref{aim3} we determined that the \glspl{dms} expand T cells that also
|
|||
performed better than beads \invivo{}. In the first experiment we performed, the
|
||||
results were very clearly in favor of the \glspl{dms}. In the second experiment,
|
||||
even the \gls{dms} group failed to fully control the tumor burden, but this is
|
||||
not surprising given the low \ptcarp{} across all groups. Also, despite this, the
|
||||
\gls{dms} group appeared to control the tumor better on average for early, mid,
|
||||
and late T cell harvesting timepoints. It was not clear if this effect was due
|
||||
to increased \cdp{} or overall increased fitness of the \gls{dms}-expanded T
|
||||
not surprising given the low \ptcarp{} across all groups. Also, despite this,
|
||||
the \gls{dms} group appeared to control the tumor better on average for early,
|
||||
mid, and late T cell harvesting timepoints. It was not clear if this effect was
|
||||
due to increased \cdp{} or overall increased fitness of the \gls{dms}-expanded T
|
||||
cells given their higher expansion rate. The \ptmemp{} did not seem to be a
|
||||
factor given that it was nearly the same in the first experiment between
|
||||
\gls{dms} and bead groups despite the clear advantage seen in the \gls{dms} group.
|
||||
\gls{dms} and bead groups despite the clear advantage seen in the \gls{dms}
|
||||
group.
|
||||
|
||||
\section{future work}
|
||||
\section{future directions}
|
||||
|
||||
There are several important next steps to perform with this work:
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Translation to GMP process}
|
||||
|
||||
While this work was done with translatability and \gls{qc} in mind, an important
|
||||
feature that is missing from the process currently is the use of \gls{gmp}
|
||||
methods and materials. The microcarriers themselves are made from
|
||||
porcine-derived collagen, which itself is not \gls{gmp}-compliant due to its
|
||||
non-human animal origins. However, using any other source of collagen should
|
||||
work so long as the structure of the microcarriers remains relatively similar
|
||||
and it has lysine groups that can react with the \gls{snb} to attach \gls{stp}
|
||||
and \glspl{mab}. Obviously these would need to be tested and verified, but they
|
||||
should not be insurmountable. Furthermore, the \gls{mab} binding step requires
|
||||
\gls{bsa} to prevent adsorption to the non-polar polymer walls of the reaction
|
||||
tubes. A human carrier protein such as \gls{hsa} could be used in its place to
|
||||
eliminate the non-human animal origin material, but this could be much more
|
||||
expensive. Alternatively, the use of protein could be replaced altogether by a
|
||||
non-ionic detergent such as Tween-20 or Tween-80, which are already used for
|
||||
commercial \gls{mab} formulations for precisely this purpose {\#}. Validating
|
||||
the process with Tween would be the best next step to eliminate \gls{bsa} from
|
||||
the process. The \gls{stp} and \glspl{mab} in this process were not
|
||||
\gls{gmp}-grade; however, they are commonly used in clinical technology such as
|
||||
dynabeads and thus the research-grade proteins used here could be easily
|
||||
replaced. The \gls{snb} is a synthetic small molecule and thus does not have any
|
||||
animal-origin concerns.
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Mechanistic investigation}
|
||||
|
||||
% why do the dms work?
|
||||
% can we put anything on the dms to enhance their potency?
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{Assessing performance using unhealthy donors}
|
||||
|
||||
All the work presented in this dissertation was performed using healthy donors.
|
||||
This was mostly due to the fact that it was much easier to obtain healthy donor
|
||||
cells and was much easier to control. However, it is indisputable that the most
|
||||
relevant test cases of the \gls{dms} will be for unhealthy patient T cells, at
|
||||
least in the case of autologous therapies. In particular, it will be interesting
|
||||
to see how the \gls{dms} performs when assessed head-to-head with bead-based
|
||||
expansion technology given that even in healthy donors, we observed the
|
||||
\gls{dms} platform to work where the beads failed
|
||||
(\cref{fig:dms_exp_fold_change}).
|
||||
|
||||
\subsection{translation to bioreactors}
|
||||
|
||||
% use dms in non-static bioreactors such as wave by first activating in a static
|
||||
% environment
|
||||
|
||||
\onecolumn
|
||||
\clearpage
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue