Selective delivery of low-affinity IL-2 to PD-1+ T cells rejuvenates antitumor immunity with reduced toxicity
Zhenhua Ren, … , Bo Li, Yang-Xin Fu
Zhenhua Ren, … , Bo Li, Yang-Xin Fu
Published February 1, 2022
Citation Information: J Clin Invest. 2022;132(3):e153604. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI153604.
View: Text | PDF
Research Article Immunology Article has an altmetric score of 9

Selective delivery of low-affinity IL-2 to PD-1+ T cells rejuvenates antitumor immunity with reduced toxicity

Abstract

PD-1 signaling on T cells is the major pathway that limits T cell immunity, but the efficacy of anti–PD-1 therapy has been limited to a small proportion of patients with advanced cancers. We fortuitously observed that anti–PD-1 therapy depends on IL-2 signaling, which raises the possibility that a lack of IL-2 limits anti–PD-1–induced effector T cell expansion. To selectively deliver IL-2 to PD-1+CD8+ tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), we engineered a low-affinity IL-2 paired with anti–PD-1 (PD-1–laIL-2), which reduced affinity to peripheral Treg cells but enhanced avidity to PD-1+CD8+ TILs. PD-1–laIL-2 exerted better tumor control and lower toxicity than single or mixed treatments. Mechanistically, PD-1–laIL-2 could effectively expand dysfunctional and tumor-specific CD8+ T cells. Furthermore, we discovered that presumably dysfunctional PD-1+TIM3+ TILs are the dominant tumor-specific T cells responding to PD-1–laIL-2. Collectively, these results highlight that PD-1–laIL-2 can target and reactivate tumor-specific TILs for tumor regression as a unique strategy with stronger efficacy and lower toxicity.

Authors

Zhenhua Ren, Anli Zhang, Zhichen Sun, Yong Liang, Jianfeng Ye, Jian Qiao, Bo Li, Yang-Xin Fu

×

Figure 2

PD-1 antibody–armed laIL-2 has enhanced tumor control.

Options: View larger image (or click on image) Download as PowerPoint
PD-1 antibody–armed laIL-2 has enhanced tumor control. (A) A20 tumor-bea...
(A) A20 tumor-bearing mice (n = 5/group) were treated with equal molar amounts of Erb–laIL-2 (20 μg), anti–PD-1 (10 μg), or PD-1–laIL-2 (20 μg) on day 17. Tumor growth was assessed twice a week. (B) MC38 tumor-bearing mice (n = 5/group) were treated with equal molar amounts of Erb–laIL-2 (20 μg) and anti–PD-1 (10 μg) or PD-1–laIL-2 (20 μg) on day 21. Tumor growth was assessed twice a week. (C) A20 tumor-bearing mice (n = 5/group) were treated with 20 μg PD-1–laIL-2 or PD-1–wtIL-2 on day 17. Tumor growth was assessed twice a week. (D) A20 tumor-bearing mice (n = 5/group) were treated with equal molar amounts of Erb–laIL-2 (20 μg), anti–PD-L1 (10 μg), or PD-L1–laIL-2 (20 μg) on day 14. Tumor growth was assessed twice a week. (E) A20 tumor-bearing mice (n = 5/group) were treated with 20 μg Erb–laIL-2, PD-L1–laIL-2, or PD-1–laIL-2 on day 14. Tumor growth was assessed twice a week. (F) A20 tumor-bearing mice (n = 5/group) were treated with 20 μg PD-1–laIL-2 and/or 100 μg anti–PD-L1 on day 20. Tumor growth was assessed twice a week. (G) A375 tumor-bearing humanized mice (n = 5/group) were treated with equal molar amounts of Erb–laIL-2 (20 μg) and anti–hPD-1 (10 μg) or hPD-1–laIL-2 (20 μg) on day 11. Tumor growth was assessed twice a week. Data represent mean ± SEM from 2 to 3 independent experiments. The P value was determined by 2-way ANOVA with Geisser-Greenhouse correction (A–G). **P < 0.01 and ****P < 0.0001.