Photodynamic Therapy of Tumors Can Lead to Development of Systemic Antigen-Specific Immune Response

Background: The mechanism by which the immune system can effectively recognize and destroy tumors is dependent on recognition of tumor antigens. The molecular identity of a number of these antigens has recently been identified and several immunotherapies have explored them as targets. Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is an anti-cancer modality that uses a non-toxic photosensitizer and visible light to produce cytotoxic reactive oxygen species that destroy tumors. PDT has been shown to lead to local destruction of tumors as well as to induction of anti-tumor immune response. Methodology/Principal Findings: We used a pair of equally lethal BALB/c colon adenocarcinomas, CT26 wild-type (CT26WT) and CT26.CL25 that expressed a tumor antigen, β-galactosidase (β-gal), and we treated them with vascular PDT. All mice bearing antigen-positive, but not antigen-negative tumors were cured and resistant to rechallenge. T lymphocytes isolated from cured mice were able to specifically lyse antigen positive cells and recognize the epitope derived from beta-galactosidase antigen. PDT was capable of destroying distant, untreated, established, antigen-expressing tumors in 70% of the mice. The remaining 30% escaped destruction due to loss of expression of tumor antigen. The PDT anti-tumor effects were completely abrogated in the absence of the adaptive immune response. Conclusion: Understanding the role of antigen-expression in PDT immune response may allow application of PDT in metastatic as well as localized disease. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time that PDT has been shown to lead to systemic, antigen- specific anti-tumor immunity.United States. National Cancer Institute (grant RO1CA/AI838801)United States. National Cancer Institute (grant R01AI050875

Ameliorative Effects of Dimetylthiourea and N-Acetylcysteine on Nanoparticles Induced Cyto-Genotoxicity in Human Lung Cancer Cells-A549

We study the ameliorative potential of dimetylthiourea (DMTU), an OH• radical trapper and N-acetylcysteine (NAC), a glutathione precursor/H2O2 scavenger against titanium dioxide nanoparticles (TiO2-NPs) and multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) induced cyto-genotoxicity in cultured human lung cancer cells-A549. Cytogenotoxicity was induced by exposing the cells to selected concentrations (10 and 50 µg/ml) of either of TiO2-NPs or MWCNTs for 24 h. Anti-cytogenotoxicity effects of DMTU and NAC were studied in two groups, i.e., treatment of 30 minutes prior to toxic insult (short term exposure), while the other group received DMTU and NAC treatment during nanoparticles exposure, i.e., 24 h (long term exposure). Investigations were carried out for cell viability, generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), micronuclei (MN), and expression of markers of oxidative stress (HSP27, CYP2E1), genotoxicity (P53) and CYP2E1 dependent n- nitrosodimethylamine-demethylase (NDMA-d) activity. In general, the treatment of both DMTU and NAC was found to be effective significantly against TiO2-NPs and MWCNTs induced cytogenotoxicity in A549 cells. Long-term treatment of DMTU and NAC during toxic insults has shown better prevention than short-term pretreatment. Although, cells responded significantly to both DMTU and NAC, but responses were chemical specific. In part, TiO2-NPs induced toxic responses were mediated through OH• radicals generation and reduction in the antioxidant defense system. While in the case of MWCNTs, adverse effects were primarily due to altering/hampering the enzymatic antioxidant system. Data indicate the applicability of human lung cancer cells-A549 as a pre-screening tool to identify the target specific prophylactic and therapeutic potential of drugs candidate molecules against nanoparticles induced cellular damages

Genotype-Specific Differences between Mouse CNS Stem Cell Lines Expressing Frontotemporal Dementia Mutant or Wild Type Human Tau

Stem cell (SC) lines that capture the genetics of disease susceptibility provide new research tools. To assess the utility of mouse central nervous system (CNS) SC-containing neurosphere cultures for studying heritable neurodegenerative disease, we compared neurosphere cultures from transgenic mice that express human tau with the P301L familial frontotemporal dementia (FTD) mutation, rTg(tauP301L)4510, with those expressing comparable levels of wild type human tau, rTg(tauwt)21221. rTg(tauP301L)4510 mice express the human tauP301L variant in their forebrains and display cellular, histological, biochemical and behavioral abnormalities similar to those in human FTD, including age-dependent differences in tau phosphorylation that distinguish them from rTg(tauwt)21221 mice. We compared FTD-hallmark tau phosphorylation in neurospheres from rTg(tauP301L)4510 mice and from rTg(tauwt)21221 mice. The tau genotype-specific phosphorylation patterns in neurospheres mimicked those seen in mice, validating use of neurosphere cultures as models for studying tau phosphorylation. Genotype-specific tau phosphorylation was observed in 35 independent cell lines from individual fetuses; tau in rTg(tauP301L)4510 cultures was hypophosphorylated in comparison with rTg(tauwt)21221 as was seen in young adult mice. In addition, there were fewer human tau-expressing cells in rTg(tauP301L)4510 than in rTg(tauwt)21221 cultures. Following differentiation, neuronal filopodia-spine density was slightly greater in rTg(tauP301L)4510 than rTg(tauwt)21221 and control cultures. Together with the recapitulation of genotype-specific phosphorylation patterns, the observation that neurosphere lines maintained their cell line-specific-differences and retained SC characteristics over several passages supports the utility of SC cultures as surrogates for analysis of cellular disease mechanisms

Classifying the evolutionary and ecological features of neoplasms

The consensus conference was supported by Wellcome Genome Campus Advanced Courses and Scientific Conferences. C.C.M. is supported in part by US NIH grants P01 CA91955, R01 CA149566, R01 CA170595, R01 CA185138 and R01 CA140657 as well as CDMRP Breast Cancer Research Program Award BC132057. M.J. is supported by NIH grant K99CA201606. K.S.A. is supported by NCI 5R21 CA196460. K. Polyak is supported by R35 CA197623, U01 CA195469, U54 CA193461, and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. K.J.P. is supported by NIH grants CA143803, CA163124, CA093900 and CA143055. D.P. is supported by the European Research Council (ERC-617457- PHYLOCANCER), the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (BFU2015-63774-P) and the Education, Culture and University Development Department of the Galician Government. K.S.A. is supported in part by the Breast Cancer Research Foundation and NCI R21CA196460. C.S. is supported by the Royal Society, Cancer Research UK (FC001169), the UK Medical Research Council (FC001169), and the Wellcome Trust (FC001169), NovoNordisk Foundation (ID 16584), the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (BCRF), the European Research Council (THESEUS) and Marie Curie Network PloidyNet. T.A.G. is a Cancer Research UK fellow and a Wellcome Trust funded Investigator. E.S.H. is supported by R01 CA185138-01 and W81XWH-14-1-0473. M.Gerlinger is supported by Cancer Research UK and The Royal Marsden/ICR National Institute of Health Research Biomedical Research Centre. M.Ge., M.Gr., Y.Y., and A.So. were also supported in part by the Wellcome Trust [105104/Z/14/Z]. J.D.S. holds the Edward B. Clark, MD Chair in Pediatric Research, and is supported by the Primary Children's Hospital (PCH) Pediatric Cancer Research Program, funded by the Intermountain Healthcare Foundation and the PCH Foundation. A.S. is supported by the Chris Rokos Fellowship in Evolution and Cancer. Y.Y. is a Cancer Research UK fellow and supported by The Royal Marsden/ICR National Institute of Health Research Biomedical Research Centre. E.S.H. was supported in part by PCORI grants 1505–30497 and 1503–29572, NIH grants R01 CA185138, T32 CA093245, and U10 CA180857, CDMRP Breast Cancer Research Program Award BC132057, a CRUK Grand Challenge grant, and the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. A.R.A.A. was funded in part by NIH grant U01CA151924. A.R.A.A., R.G. and J.S.B. were funded in part by NIH grant U54CA193489