15 research outputs found

    31st Annual Meeting and Associated Programs of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC 2016) : part two

    Get PDF
    Background The immunological escape of tumors represents one of the main ob- stacles to the treatment of malignancies. The blockade of PD-1 or CTLA-4 receptors represented a milestone in the history of immunotherapy. However, immune checkpoint inhibitors seem to be effective in specific cohorts of patients. It has been proposed that their efficacy relies on the presence of an immunological response. Thus, we hypothesized that disruption of the PD-L1/PD-1 axis would synergize with our oncolytic vaccine platform PeptiCRAd. Methods We used murine B16OVA in vivo tumor models and flow cytometry analysis to investigate the immunological background. Results First, we found that high-burden B16OVA tumors were refractory to combination immunotherapy. However, with a more aggressive schedule, tumors with a lower burden were more susceptible to the combination of PeptiCRAd and PD-L1 blockade. The therapy signifi- cantly increased the median survival of mice (Fig. 7). Interestingly, the reduced growth of contralaterally injected B16F10 cells sug- gested the presence of a long lasting immunological memory also against non-targeted antigens. Concerning the functional state of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs), we found that all the immune therapies would enhance the percentage of activated (PD-1pos TIM- 3neg) T lymphocytes and reduce the amount of exhausted (PD-1pos TIM-3pos) cells compared to placebo. As expected, we found that PeptiCRAd monotherapy could increase the number of antigen spe- cific CD8+ T cells compared to other treatments. However, only the combination with PD-L1 blockade could significantly increase the ra- tio between activated and exhausted pentamer positive cells (p= 0.0058), suggesting that by disrupting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis we could decrease the amount of dysfunctional antigen specific T cells. We ob- served that the anatomical location deeply influenced the state of CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes. In fact, TIM-3 expression was in- creased by 2 fold on TILs compared to splenic and lymphoid T cells. In the CD8+ compartment, the expression of PD-1 on the surface seemed to be restricted to the tumor micro-environment, while CD4 + T cells had a high expression of PD-1 also in lymphoid organs. Interestingly, we found that the levels of PD-1 were significantly higher on CD8+ T cells than on CD4+ T cells into the tumor micro- environment (p < 0.0001). Conclusions In conclusion, we demonstrated that the efficacy of immune check- point inhibitors might be strongly enhanced by their combination with cancer vaccines. PeptiCRAd was able to increase the number of antigen-specific T cells and PD-L1 blockade prevented their exhaus- tion, resulting in long-lasting immunological memory and increased median survival

    Applications and Future Opportunities

    No full text
    Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) is the root of Health Economics and is based on the welfare theory. CBA is the broadest economic evaluation (EE) method that assesses all benefits and costs in monetary units; the production of welfare is expressed in terms of net benefit (the difference between benefits and costs). The main goal in the welfarist approach is to maximize welfare according to individuals preferences. The application of CBA principles faces multiple obstacles, mainly because valuing health in terms of monetary units is challenging and raises ethical and methodological constraints. In the health sector, CBA has received relevant criticism, leading to the emergence and adoption of other methods of EE, such as cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and cost-utility analysis (CUA). However, attempts to apply welfarist principles to CEA were far of being accepted, and consensus among health economists in this regard still does not exist. The extra-welfarist approach encompassing CEA and CUA has progressed toward maximizing health outcomes and focusing on equity and fairness issues. The most common technique used in CBA to elicit preferences is the contingent valuation (willingness to pay). Despite the challenging task of valuing mental health outcomes, some studies demonstrate the feasibility of this technique in people with mental disorders, though some level of inconsistency and inaccuracy in respondents answers was reported. Despite methodological limitations among all EE methods applied to health, there is a growing interest in CBA and, more specifically, in discrete choice experiment, especially for health services and public health policies, and in exploring patients treatment preferences. The Mental Health field adds challenges to CBA regarding the complexity of defining and measuring outcomes representing mental health maximization. Document type: Boo
    corecore