Conflicts of interest in translational research

Translational research requires a team approach to scientific inquiry and product development. Translational research teams consist of basic and clinical scientists who can be members of both academic and industrial communities. The conception, pre-clinical testing, and clinical evaluation of a diagnostic or therapeutic approach demands an intense interaction between investigators with diverse backgrounds. As the barriers between industry and academia are removed, issues of potential conflict of interest become more complex. Translational researchers must become aware of the situations which constitute conflict of interest and understand how such conflicts can impact their research programs. Finally, the translational research community must participate in the dialogue ongoing in the public and private sectors and help shape the rules that will govern conflicts that arise during the evolution of their research programs

Sensitivity and specificity of tritiated thymidine incorporation and ELISPOT assays in identifying antigen specific T cell immune responses

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Standardization of cell-based immunologic monitoring is becoming increasingly important as methods for measuring cellular immunity become more complex. We assessed the ability of two commonly used cell-based assays, tritiated thymidine incorporation (proliferation) and IFN-gamma ELISPOT, to predict T cell responses to HER-2/neu, tetanus toxoid (tt), and cytomegalovirus (CMV) antigens. These antigens were determined to be low (HER-2/neu), moderate (tt), and robustly (CMV) immunogenic proteins. Samples from 27 Stage II, III, and IV HER-2/neu positive breast cancer patients, vaccinated against the HER-2/neu protein and tt, were analyzed by tritiated thymidine incorporation and IFN-gamma ELISPOT for T cell response.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Linear regression analysis indicates that both stimulation index (SI) (p = 0.011) and IFN-gamma secreting precursor frequency (p < 0.001) are significant indicators of antigen specific immunity. ROC curves plotted to assess the performance of tritiated thymidine incorporation and the ELISPOT assay indicate that SI is a significant indicator of low T cell response to the HER-2/neu vaccine (p = 0.05), and of moderate and robust responses to tt (p = 0.01) and CMV (p = 0.016), respectively. IFN-gamma precursor frequency is a significant indicator of a robust T cell response to CMV (p = 0.03), but not of moderate tt (p = 0.09), or low HER-2/neu (p = 0.09) T cell responses.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>These data underscore the importance of taking into consideration the performance characteristics of assays used to measure T cell immunity. This consideration is particularly necessary when determining which method to utilize for assessing responses to immunotherapeutic manipulations in cancer patients.</p

Immuno-Oncology biomarkers 2010 and beyond: Perspectives from the iSBTc/SITC biomarker task force

The International Society for Biological Therapy of Cancer (iSBTc, recently renamed the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer, SITC) hosted a one-day symposium at the National Institutes of Health on September 30, 2010 to address development and application of biomarkers in cancer immunotherapy. The symposium, titled Immuno-Oncology Biomarkers 2010 and Beyond: Perspectives from the iSBTc/SITC Biomarker Task Force, gathered approximately 230 investigators equally from academia, industry and governmental/regulatory agencies from around the globe for panel discussions and presentations on the following topics: 1) immunologic monitoring: standardization and validation of assays; 2) correlation of immunity to biologic activity, clinical response and potency assays; 3) novel methodologies for assessing the immune landscape: clinical utility of novel technologies; and 4) recommendations on incorporation of biomarkers into the clinical arena. The presentations are summarized in this report; additional program information and slides are available online at the iSBTc/SITC website

SITC 2018 workshop report: Immuno-Oncology Biomarkers: State of the Art.

Identification of biomarkers in cancer immunotherapy that predict therapeutic response and/or limit adverse events are a critical need in the field. To address recent progress and hurdles around cancer biomarker development and utilization, the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (SITC) convened a workshop, Immuno-Oncology Biomarkers: State of the Art, on May 16-17, 2018. Topics discussed included challenges in handling biospecimens, identification and validation of new biomarkers, data sharing, and collaborating across disciplines to advance biomarker development. Panel discussions followed session presentations to help foster participant conversation and discuss future projects and collaborations. The results of the Workshop include the development of new initiatives for the SITC Biomarkers Committee

Precision and linearity targets for validation of an IFNγ ELISPOT, cytokine flow cytometry, and tetramer assay using CMV peptides

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Single-cell assays of immune function are increasingly used to monitor T cell responses in immunotherapy clinical trials. Standardization and validation of such assays are therefore important to interpretation of the clinical trial data. Here we assess the levels of intra-assay, inter-assay, and inter-operator precision, as well as linearity, of CD8+ T cell IFNγ-based ELISPOT and cytokine flow cytometry (CFC), as well as tetramer assays.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Precision was measured in cryopreserved PBMC with a low, medium, or high response level to a CMV pp65 peptide or peptide mixture. Intra-assay precision was assessed using 6 replicates per assay; inter-assay precision was assessed by performing 8 assays on different days; and inter-operator precision was assessed using 3 different operators working on the same day. Percent CV values ranged from 4% to 133% depending upon the assay and response level. Linearity was measured by diluting PBMC from a high responder into PBMC from a non-responder, and yielded R²values from 0.85 to 0.99 depending upon the assay and antigen.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>These data provide target values for precision and linearity of single-cell assays for those wishing to validate these assays in their own laboratories. They also allow for comparison of the precision and linearity of ELISPOT, CFC, and tetramer across a range of response levels. There was a trend toward tetramer assays showing the highest precision, followed closely by CFC, and then ELISPOT; while all three assays had similar linearity. These findings are contingent upon the use of optimized protocols for each assay.</p

If we build it they will come: targeting the immune response to breast cancer.

Historically, breast cancer tumors have been considered immunologically quiescent, with the majority of tumors demonstrating low lymphocyte infiltration, low mutational burden, and modest objective response rates to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monotherapy. Tumor and immunologic profiling has shed light on potential mechanisms of immune evasion in breast cancer, as well as unique aspects of the tumor microenvironment (TME). These include elements associated with antigen processing and presentation as well as immunosuppressive elements, which may be targeted therapeutically. Examples of such therapeutic strategies include efforts to (1) expand effector T-cells, natural killer (NK) cells and immunostimulatory dendritic cells (DCs), (2) improve antigen presentation, and (3) decrease inhibitory cytokines, tumor-associated M2 macrophages, regulatory T- and B-cells and myeloid derived suppressor cells (MDSCs). The goal of these approaches is to alter the TME, thereby making breast tumors more responsive to immunotherapy. In this review, we summarize key developments in our understanding of antitumor immunity in breast cancer, as well as emerging therapeutic modalities that may leverage that understanding to overcome immunologic resistance