8ra19 (2009) Omar A. Ali: Sci Transl Med Et Al
8ra19 (2009) Omar A. Ali: Sci Transl Med Et Al
8ra19 (2009) Omar A. Ali: Sci Transl Med Et Al
in Mice
Omar A. Ali et al.
Sci Transl Med 1, 8ra19 (2009);
DOI: 10.1126/scitranslmed.3000359
Editor's Summary
Key to many immune-based approaches to cancer therapy, dendritic cells survey the body for pathogens and
activate immune responses against them. When immature dendritic cells recognize the molecular features
characteristic of some pathogens, like DNA rich in guanosine and cytosine, the cells mature, migrate to lymph nodes,
and activate T cells that recognize antigens presented on the dendritic cell surface. One approach to cancer vaccine
production is to isolate dendritic precursor cells from the patient's blood, to use in vitro treatments to convert them to
dendritic cells, and then to expose them to tumor antigens. The cells are then infused back into the patient so that
they will induce tumor-directed immune attack. Although responses occur, in general the vaccines do not increase the
patients' survival time relative to standard treatments or cause solid tumors to regress. A more effective cancer
vaccine might require the induction of more than one class of dendritic cells, because different dendritic cell
populations have different specialties, such as antigen presentation and the production of cytokines that control
regulatory T cell activity.
Mooney's group aimed to generate a varied population of dendritic cells by creating a device that imitates an
infection site in the host itself. Previously, they developed an implantable polymer matrix that releases an
inflammatory cytokine to recruit dendritic cells and displays short strands of pathogen-like DNA and tumor antigens to
activate those cells. In the present work, these researchers showed that implanting this system in mice leads to the
activation of multiple dendritic cell types and the generation of tumor-fighting cytotoxic T cells, as well as to the
inhibition of regulatory T cell activity. The multiple components of the system have different and synergistic effects on
the host's immune system. Notably, when used as a vaccine in mice with established melanoma, it caused complete
remission of tumors and long-term survival of a substantial portion of the population. This system, which has practical
advantages over approaches in which the patient's cells are cultured, may serve as a paradigm for the design of
human vaccines.
Science Translational Medicine (print ISSN 1946-6234; online ISSN 1946-6242) is published weekly, except the
last week in December, by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1200 New York Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20005. Copyright 2009 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science; all
rights reserved. The title Science Translational Medicine is a registered trademark of AAAS.
It was a momentous moment in medical history when the English doctor Edward Jenner inoculated a young boy
with cowpox, thus preventing him from catching smallpox and heralding the arrival of an era in which many infectious
diseases are routinely prevented by vaccination. Today, scientists are striving to design vaccines to treat cancera
much more complex biological challenge by enhancing the body's immune response against tumor cells. One
critical problem is that tumors actively inhibit the immune response: They secrete factors that suppress the immune
system and induce regulatory T cells that restrain the activity of tumor-fighting immune cells. Now, Mooney and
colleagues describe an anticancer vaccine that triggers a sustained antitumor immune response and inhibits
regulatory T cell activityand shows promising results in mice with cancer.
A complete electronic version of this article and other services, including high-resolution figures,
can be found at:
http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/1/8/8ra19.full.html
Supplementary Material can be found in the online version of this article at:
http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/suppl/2009/11/21/1.8.8ra19.DC1.html
Information about obtaining reprints of this article or about obtaining permission to reproduce this
article in whole or in part can be found at:
http://www.sciencemag.org/about/permissions.dtl
Science Translational Medicine (print ISSN 1946-6234; online ISSN 1946-6242) is published weekly, except the
last week in December, by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1200 New York Avenue
NW, Washington, DC 20005. Copyright 2009 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science; all
rights reserved. The title Science Translational Medicine is a registered trademark of AAAS.
RESEARCH ARTICLE
CANCER IMMUNOTHERAPY
Vaccines are largely ineffective for patients with established cancer, as advanced disease requires potent and
sustained activation of CD8+ cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) to kill tumor cells and clear the disease. Recent studies
have found that subsets of dendritic cells (DCs) specialize in antigen cross-presentation and in the production of
cytokines, which regulate both CTLs and T regulatory (Treg) cells that shut down effector T cell responses. Here,
we addressed the hypothesis that coordinated regulation of a DC network, and plasmacytoid DCs (pDCs) and CD8+
DCs in particular, could enhance host immunity in mice. We used functionalized biomaterials incorporating
various combinations of an inflammatory cytokine, immune danger signal, and tumor lysates to control the
activation and localization of host DC populations in situ. The numbers of pDCs and CD8+ DCs, and the endogenous
production of interleukin-12, all correlated strongly with the magnitude of protective antitumor immunity and the
generation of potent CD8+ CTLs. Vaccination by this method maintained local and systemic CTL responses for
extended periods while inhibiting FoxP3 Treg activity during antigen clearance, resulting in complete regression
of distant and established melanoma tumors. The efficacy of this vaccine as a monotherapy against large invasive
tumors may be a result of the local activity of pDCs and CD8+ DCs induced by persistent danger and antigen
signaling at the vaccine site. These results indicate that a critical pattern of DC subsets correlates with the evolution of therapeutic antitumor responses and provide a template for future vaccine design.
INTRODUCTION
Dendritic cells (DCs) are promising effectors of immunotherapy as they
are essential for initiating and regulating T cell immunity. The interaction between DCs and pathogens can lead to antigen capture and processing by DCs. Pathogen-associated molecular patterns, including
lipopolysaccharides and cytosine-guanosine (CpG)rich sequences
in pathogenic DNA, activate DCs via ligation of particular Toll-like
receptors (TLRs), which stimulate DC expression of specific costimulatory molecules and cytokines capable of propagating the appropriate T cell response. Activated DCs migrate to lymphoid tissues where
they present pathogenic antigens and stimulatory molecules to nave
T cells, leading to T cell activation, expansion, and specific responses.
Chronic exposure to tumor antigens with inappropriate costimulation and immunomodulation by T regulatory (Treg) cells allows solid
tumors to develop by dysregulating DC activity and the cytotoxic T
lymphocyte (CTL) responses required to kill tumor cells (1, 2). Cancer
vaccines are frequently developed with easily accessible, patientderived blood monocytes that are transformed into DCs ex vivo with
cytokine mixtures and pulsed with tumor antigens to promote antigen
presentation (35). These antigen-loaded DCs are then infused back
into cancer patients with the goal of inducing antitumor immune responses mediated primarily by T helper 1 (TH1) cells and CTLs (35).
Although clinical trials using such ex vivo DC vaccines in patients
with advanced cancer have resulted in antigen-specific T cell expan1
School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 29 Oxford Street, 319 Pierce Hall,
Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA. 2InCytu Inc., 701 George Washington
Highway, Lincoln, RI 02865, USA. 3Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering,
Cambridge, MA 02138, USA. 4Department of Medical Oncology and Cancer Vaccine
Center, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02115, USA. 5Department of Medicine,
Brigham and Womens Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
*To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: [email protected]
www.ScienceTranslationalMedicine.org
25 November 2009
BLANK
1.2 106
**
1 10 6
8 10 5
**
10
CD11b
**
6 10 5
10
10
1.24
RESULTS
4 10 5
2 10 5
10
0
70.4
7 10
6 10
5 10
4 10
3 10
2 10
1 10
E
*
**
**
**
3.59
0 10
D
CD11c+CD86+ dendritic cells
(cell no.)
24.7
that are not found in the steady state (15), which suggests that stimuli
in tissue microenvironments provoke a response from the network of
DCs. The cytokine granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor
(GM-CSF) is present at increased concentrations during inflammation
(16, 17), which may cause the recruitment of both monocytes and DCs
while inducing local monocytes to differentiate into DCs (15, 1719).
Recently, we described the development of implantable synthetic polymer matrices that spatially and temporally control the in vivo presentation of cytokines, tumor antigens, and danger signals (20). GM-CSF is
released from these polylactide-co-glycolide (PLG) [a Food and Drug
Administration (FDA)approved biomaterial] matrices into the surrounding tissue to recruit DC precursors and DCs. CpG-rich oligonucleotides are immobilized on the matrices as danger signals, and
antigen (tumor lysates) is released to matrix-resident DCs to program
DC development and maturation. These matrices quantitatively regulate DC activation and trafficking in situ and induce prophylactic immunity against inoculations of murine B16-F10 melanoma cells (14).
Here, we have investigated the ability of this system to control the recruitment and activation of multiple DC and T cell subsets and to provide therapeutic vaccination against established tumors.
1 10
8 10
6 10
4 10
2 10
10
CD11c
**
**
10
10
**
**
1 10
Fig. 1. GM-CSF delivery from PLG
matrices promotes CD11b+ DC re8 105
**
cruitment and activation. (A) H&E
5
staining of sectioned PLG scaffolds
6 10
**
explanted from subcutaneous pock4 105
ets in the backs of C57BL/6J mice
**
**
**
after 14 days: blank scaffolds (BLANK)
2 105
and GM-CSF (3000 ng)loaded scaffolds (GM-CSF). (B) Number of CD11c+
0
Blank 400 ng 3000 ng 7000 ng
DCs isolated from PLG scaffolds at
day 14 after implantation in response to doses of 0, 1000, 3000, and 7000 ng
of GM-CSF. (C) FACS plots of cells isolated from explanted scaffolds and stained
for CD11c and CD11b. Cells were isolated from PLG matrices incorporating
3000 ng of GM-CSF at day 10 after implantation. Numbers in FACS plots indicate the percentage of the cell population positive for CD11c and CD11b or
for both markers. (D to F) Number of CD11c+CD86+ (D), CD11c+CCR7+ (E),
and CD11c+MHCII+ (F) DCs isolated from PLG scaffolds at day 14 after implantation in response to doses of 0, 400, 3000, and 7000 ng of GM-CSF. Scale
bar in (A), 100 mm. Values in (B) and (D) to (F) represent mean and SD (n = 4 or 5).
*P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 versus blank matrices unless otherwise noted.
www.ScienceTranslationalMedicine.org
25 November 2009
RESEARCH ARTICLE
RESEARCH ARTICLE
A
10
10
10
0
2.57 10 5 5.70
2.90
10
10
10
0 ug 0
0 10
10
10
1 ug
2
0 10
10
10
5
7.71 10 4.62
105 5.98
CD11c
10
4.86
10
12.0
104
10
103
10
102
10
10 ug 0
0
0 102
103
104
105
100 ug
0 10
10
10
10
PDCA-1
1.6 10 6
**
1.4 10 6
3 106
CD11c+Cd11b+ DCs
(cell no.)
Plasmacytoid DCs
(cell no.)
1.2 10 6
4 10 5
2 106
1 106
5 105
2 10 5
**
1.5 106
6 10 5
**
2.5 106
1 10 6
8 10 5
3.5 106
Blank 100 GM
1
10 100
+GM +GM +GM
Blank 100 GM
2000
* *
1
10 100
+GM +GM +GM
1000
**
800
1500
600
1000
500
400
200
Blank 100
GM
1
10 100
+GM +GM +GM
Blank 100
GM
1
10 100
+GM +GM +GM
Fig. 2. CpG-ODN and GM-CSF delivery from PLG matrices promotes pDC
generation and the production of antitumor cytokines. (A) FACS plots of cells
isolated from explanted scaffolds and stained for the pDC markers CD11c and
PDCA-1. Cells were isolated from PLG matrices incorporating 0, 1, 10, and 100
mg of CpG-ODN at day 10 after implantation. Numbers in FACS plots indicate
the percentage of the cell population positive for CD11c only or for both markers. (B and C) The number of pDCs (B) and CD11c+CD11b+ cDCs (C) at day 10
after implantation in blank scaffolds (Blank) or in response to doses of 100 mg
(100) of CpG-ODN or 3000 ng of GM-CSF alone (GM) or GM-CSF in combination
with 1 mg (1+GM), 10 mg (10+GM), or 100 mg (100+GM) of CpG-ODN. (D and E)
The in vivo concentrations of IFN-a (D) and IFN-g (E) at day 10 after implantation at the implant site of blank PLG matrices (Blank) or matrices loaded
with 3000 ng of GM-CSF alone (GM) or 10 mg or 100 mg (100) of CpG-ODN
alone or GM-CSF in combination with 10 mg (10+GM) or 100 mg (100+GM) of
CpG-ODN. Values in (B) to (E) represent mean and SD (n = 4 or 5). *P < 0.05,
**P < 0.01 as compared to blank matrices unless otherwise noted.
www.ScienceTranslationalMedicine.org
25 November 2009
10
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Blank
CpG+GM
4.31
0.78
10 5
0 10 2
10 3
CD8+
**
4 10
2 10
0 10 2
10 4
1.5 10
1 10
5 10
**
CD8+
10 4
10 5
**
5 10
4 10
3 10
*
**
2 10
1 10
0
2000
* **
10 3
6 106
**
2 106
600
0 10 2
3 106
2.2
61
10 5
CD8+
500
10 3
2.5 106
6 10
103
1.1
75
10 5
9.09
102
0
10 2
0
1 106
8 10
CD11c+CD8+ DCs
(cell no.)
10 4
27.4
104
10 3
0.7
94.1
105
CD11c+
CD11c+
103
102
0
1.56
10 4
Plasmacytoid DCs
(cell no.)
CD11c+
104
CpG+GM+Ant
22.3
CD11c+CD11b+ DCs
(cell no.)
105
IL-12 concentration
(pg/ml tissue)
Fig. 3. Tumor lysate, CpG-ODN, and GMCSF co-delivery from PLG matrices stimulates CD8 + DC generation and IL-12
production. (A) FACS density plots of
CD11c and CD8 staining of cells infiltrating blank PLG matrices (Blank) or matrices
loaded with 3000 ng of GM-CSF and 100 mg
of CpG-ODN without (CpG+GM) or with
tumor lysates (CpG+GM+Ant) at day 10.
Numbers in FACS plots indicate the percentage of the cell population positive
for CD11c (upper left quadrant of each
plot) and CD8 (lower right) or for both
markers (upper right). (B to D) Number
of CD11c+CD8+ cDCs (B), pDCs (C), and
CD11c+CD11b+ cDCs (D) at day 10 after
implantation in blank matrices (Blank) and
in response to 3000 ng of GM-CSF (GM) or
100 mg of CpG-ODN (CpG) alone or in
combination (CpG+GM) or copresented
with tumor lysates (GM+Ant, CpG+Ant,
and CpG+GM+Ant). (E to G) In vivo concentration of IL-12 (E), IFN-a (F), and IFN-g
(G) at day 10 after implantation in blank
matrices (Blank) and in response to doses
of 3000 ng of GM-CSF (GM) or 100 mg of
CpG-ODN (CpG) alone or in combination
(CpG+GM) or copresented with tumor lysates
(GM+Ant, CpG+Ant, and CpG+GM+Ant).
Values in (B) to (G) represent mean and
SD (n = 4 or 5). *P < 0.05, **P < 0.01 versus
blank matrices, unless otherwise noted.
1200
**
**
1000
1500
400
300
800
1000
600
*
200
400
*
*
500
100
0
200
Blank GM CpG GM+ GM+CpG+ GM+
CpG Ant Ant CpG+
Ant
www.ScienceTranslationalMedicine.org
25 November 2009
indicating that systemic antimelanoma responses were being generated and sustained for extended periods.
impact of the engineered matrices on the induction of immunosuppressive pathways. Monitoring CD4+ T cell responses to antigenpresenting matrices with GM-CSF and CpG revealed peak activity
at days 5 and 7, which decreased to negligible concentrations by
day 12 after implantation (Fig. 6A). In contrast, matrices containing GM-CSF and tumor lysate led to a significant enhancement of
CD4+ T cell infiltration at day 12 (Fig. 6B), and these cells likely contribute to regulation of CTL responses. Incorporation of GM-CSF and
tumor lysate into the vaccine matrix led to a factor of 10 increase in
TGF-b concentrations (Fig. 6C) and a significant increase in IL-10
(Fig. 6D) at the vaccine site; these are cytokines commonly associated
with Treg activity and immunosuppression. Further, as observed previously in GM-CSFbased vaccines (33, 34), GM-CSF cosignaling with
tumor antigens resulted in a significant CD3+FoxP3+ response at the
vaccine site (Fig. 6, E and F) when compared to all other matrix formulations, resulting in an almost even ratio of CD8+ effectors and
FoxP3 Treg cells (Fig. 6G). CpG-ODN presentation in concert with
both tumor lysate and GM-CSF counteracted these immunosuppressive mechanisms, as TGF-b and IL-10 concentrations and Treg
activity were not enhanced over the control matrices, and CD8+ CTLs
outnumbered FoxP3+ T cells by a factor of 25 at day 12 after implantation (Fig. 6, C to G). Altogether, these findings suggest that this
vaccine system is able to promote and extend CTL responses likely
through nave T cell differentiation induced by pDCs and CD8+
DCs, the corresponding production of type 1 IFNs and IL-12, and inhibition of negative feedback mechanisms.
CD8+ T cells
(cell no.)
CD8+TRP2-Pentamer+
Splenocytes (cell no.)
TRP2 pentamer
TRP2 pentamer
CD3
www.ScienceTranslationalMedicine.org
25 November 2009
RESEARCH ARTICLE
as matrices with GM-CSF and CpG did not enhance survival times
significantly (Fig. 7, A and B). Strikingly, 47% of the mice (animals
bearing day 9 tumors) vaccinated twice with PLG vaccines survived
long-term and free of detectable tumors; this treatment regimen
was able to completely eradicate tumors of up to 25 mm2 in size
(Fig. 7C).
To test whether PLG vaccines could be effective against an even
greater tumor burden, we established melanoma tumors for 13
days and then vaccinated the mice. One-time (day 13) and twotime (days 13 and 23) vaccination decreased tumor progression
(Fig. 7D). Two-time vaccination doubled the mean survival time
and led to complete tumor regression in 20% of the animals with
advanced solid tumors (day 13 tumors; n = 15) (Fig. 7, D to F).
Because vaccinations were initiated at days 9 and 13 of tumor
growth, and required 5 days for CTL generation, the effector window
for immune responses was small (about 6 to 10 days) before untreated
animals succumbed to tumor burden. Variations in tumor size at the
time of vaccination likely accounted for the lack of complete regression in all animals; vaccination may not have resulted in generation of
sufficient numbers of killer T cell in time to control and clear larger
tumors. Slight hair loss and depigmentation was observed at the vac-
100
100
80
80
40
% Survival
% Survival
60
10 ug
100 ug
50 ug
20
50 ug+
GM
60
10 ug+GM
40
1 ug+GM
20
BLANK 1 ug
20
40
80
100
20
80
100
1 106
8 105
5
6 10
4 10
2 105
8 105
6 105
40
60
0.6
0.4
0.2
GM
4 105
80
100
3.5 106
3 106
2 106
2 105
1 106
5 105
r=0.896
0
20
40
60
80
100
r=0.496
0
% Survival
% Survival
GM+CpG
90
1.5 106
3 105
CpG
30
2.5 106
5 105
1 105
r=0.896
20
0.8
% Survival 20
CD11c+CD11b+ DCs
(cell no.)
CD11c+CD8+ DCs
(cell no.)
Plasmacytoid DCs
(cell no.)
1.2 10
60
7 105
40
Time (days)
1.4 106
60
Time (days)
1.2
100 ug+GM
DC fraction
(DC subset no. / total DC)
IL-12 concentration
(ng/ml tissue)
20
40
60
80
100
% Survival
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
r=0.852
20
40
60
80
100
% Survival
www.ScienceTranslationalMedicine.org
25 November 2009
RESEARCH ARTICLE
cine site, in agreement with the past study using this vaccination system (20), but no significant toxicities were observed with vaccination.
DISCUSSION
Current approaches to cancer vaccination augment cellular and
humoral antitumor reactions in many patients, but most immunized subjects still succumb to progressive disease, indicating that
vaccine responses are insufficient to effect complete tumor cell
killing (14, 36). Nonetheless, the abilities of blocking antibodies
to CTL-associated antigen4 and the adoptive transfer of T cells
in lymphodepleted hosts to accomplish tumor regressions highlight
the potential for immune-mediated destruction of advanced cancer
(35, 37). In this study, we demonstrate that the appropriate regulation of the DC network can induce complete regressions of distant
and established melanomas in mice.
Our engineered PLG vaccine evokes a coordinated response of
multiple DC subtypes, which together trigger sustained and potent
antitumor CD8+ CTLs while inhibiting immunoregulatory pathways.
2 105
CD4 T cells
(cell no.)
8 105
1.5 105
6 105
CD4 T cells
(cell no.)
Day 12
GM+CpG+Lys
1 105
5 104
4 105
2 105
0
1
12
Time (days)
Blank
Lys
F
10
1.84
10
30
20
10
0
10
0
0 10
10
10
FoxP3
10
GM+Lys
2
3 10
2.5 105
2 105
10
0.1
Blank
3.5 105
0.15
1.5 105
1 105
40
30
20
10
10
10
CD3
CD3
10
0.2
0
Blank
10
0.25
0.05
4 105
0.22
0.3
**
**
40
E
5
D
50
IL-10 concentration
(ng/ml tissue)
1 106
2.5 105
TGF- concentration
(ng/ml tissue)
GM+Lys+CpG
0 10
10
10
10
FoxP3
Fig. 6. Engineered PLG matrices attenuate FoxP3+ Treg cells and immunosuppressive cytokines. (A) Total number of CD3+CD4+ T cells isolated from
PLG matrices loaded with GM-CSF, CpG-ODN, and tumor lysates as a function of time after implantation. (B) Number of CD4 T cells at day 12 after
implantation in blank scaffolds (Blank) or in response to lysate alone (Lys)
or in combination with CpG-ODN (CpG+Lys) or GM-CSF (GM+Lys) or both
factors (GM+Lys+CpG). (C and D) The in vivo concentrations of TGF-b (C)
and IL-10 (D) at day 12 after implantation at the implant site of blank
scaffolds (Blank) or scaffolds presenting lysate alone (Lys) or in combination with CpG-ODN (CpG+Lys) or GM-CSF (GM+Lys) or both factors
(GM+Lys+CpG). (E) FACS plots of cells isolated from explanted scaffolds
and stained for the Treg cell markers CD3 and FoxP3. Cells were isolated
5 104
0
0
Blank
GM+Lys
GM+Lys+CpG
www.ScienceTranslationalMedicine.org
25 November 2009
RESEARCH ARTICLE
250
GM-CpG
V ax, 1x
GMB16
200
80
% Survival
Tumor size
(mm2)
Blank
100
150
100
60
V ax, 2x
40
GM+ CpG
V ax, 2x
20
50
10
20
30
40
50
60
20
100
Blank
Vax, 1x
20
Tumor size
(mm2)
Tumor size
(mm2)
80
200
25
150
15
Vax, 2x
100
10
50
5
0
0
20
40
60
80
Time (days)
100
20
60
15
40
Vax, 2x
Blank
0
20
Vax, 1x
40
60
10
20
30
40
50
60
25
80
20
Tumor size
(mm2)
% Survival
60
250
30
40
GMB16 V ax, 1x
Blank
0
80
100
10
0
0
20
40
60
that generated about 1,200,000 pDCs and 600,000 CD8+ DCs (43% of
total DCs) in a total population of 4.2 million DCs resulted in 90%
survival in a subsequent tumor challenge. The engineered matrices appear to program T cell responses efficiently by providing a site of sustained immunostimulatory tumor antigen presentation, which evokes
robust CTLs, both locally and systemically, and attenuates immune regulation mediated through TGF-b, IL-10, and FoxP3+ Treg cells. The
kinetics of the adaptive immune response to our system suggest that
CTLs manifested potent effector function, as vaccination resulted in a
prototypical activation phase that gradually plateaued, followed by a
contraction phase as antigen was cleared. Other vaccine formulations
achieve only short-lived stimulation with infusions of protein or manipulated cells and may not trigger this T effector profile but instead induce
at least partially dysfunctional T cells that are more likely to undergo exhaustion within the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment (14).
Together, our results highlight a critical array of DC subtypes that
are generated during the evolution of therapeutic antitumor responses
in mice, which may provide a template for rational vaccine design
more generally. Indeed, the vaccine system reported here might be
adapted to modulate DC and CTL responses for the control of other
solid cancers and perhaps chronic infections. Our approach might also
facilitate the study of DC subset development and the mechanisms
through which these subsets are coordinated in vivo for the eradication of established diseases. It is striking that tumor regression induced
by these PLG vaccines outperformed gene-modified tumor cell vaccines in direct comparison and outperformed ex vivo DC vaccines reported in literature (1, 2, 4). This acellular biomaterial system was
designed with components that either are FDA approved (PLG and
GM-CSF) or have been used clinically (CpG-ODN) and do not require the maintenance and modification of live cell cultures. Together,
these features suggest that this PLG system may have considerable
advantages in terms of clinical application relative to other approaches
reported to date. Scaling to humans will likely not require significant
modification of the size or structure of the material but will require
using effective human analogs (for example, human GM-CSF and
CpG-ODN sequences) that evoke human DC and CTL responses. It
is not clear whether the current combination of GM-CSF, CpGODN, and tumor antigen is the optimal formulation, and other dosing
regimens or alternative TLR agonists or cytokines should be tested.
80
Time (days)
METHODS
Matrix fabrication
An 85:15, 120-kD copolymer of D,L-lactide and glycolide (PLG)
(Alkermes) was used in a gas-foaming process to form porous
PLG matrices (40). In brief, PLG microspheres encapsulating GMCSF were first made with standard double emulsion (41). PLG microspheres were then mixed with 150 mg of the porogen, sucrose (sieved
to a particle size between 250 and 425 mm), and compression molded.
The resulting disc was allowed to equilibrate within a high-pressure
CO2 environment, and a rapid reduction in pressure causes the polymer particles to expand and fuse into an interconnected structure (40).
The sucrose was leached from the scaffolds by immersion in water,
yielding scaffolds that were 90% porous. To incorporate tumor lysates
into PLG scaffolds, we digested the biopsies of B16-F10 tumors that had
grown subcutaneously in the backs of C57BL/6J mice (Jackson Laboratory) in collagenase (250 U/ml) (Worthington) and suspended at a
www.ScienceTranslationalMedicine.org
25 November 2009
RESEARCH ARTICLE
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
www.sciencetranslationalmedicine.org/cgi/content/full/1/8/8ra19/DC1
Fig. S1. FACS plots of cells isolated from explanted scaffolds and stained for the DC marker
CD11c and for activation markers MHCII and CCR7.
www.ScienceTranslationalMedicine.org
25 November 2009
RESEARCH ARTICLE
9. A. DAmico, L. Wu, The early progenitors of mouse dendritic cells and plasmacytoid predendritic cells are within the bone marrow hemopoietic precursors expressing Flt3. J. Exp.
Med. 198, 293303 (2003).
10. A. M. Krieg, Development of TLR9 agonists for cancer therapy. J. Clin. Invest. 117, 11841194
(2007).
11. T. Kawai, S. Akira, Innate immune recognition of viral infection. Nat. Immunol. 7, 131137
(2006).
12. J. J. OShea, R. Visconti, Type 1 IFNs and regulation of TH1 responses: Enigmas both resolved and emerge. Nat. Immunol. 1, 1719 (2000).
13. J. A. Villadangos, P. Schnorrer, Intrinsic and cooperative antigen-presenting functions of
dendritic-cell subsets in vivo. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 7, 543555 (2007).
14. P. Schnorrer, G. M. Behrens, N. S. Wilson, J. L. Pooley, C. M. Smith, D. El-Sukkari, G. Davey,
F. Kupresanin, M. Li, E. Maraskovsky, G. T. Belz, F. R. Carbone, K. Shortman, W. R. Heath,
J. A. Villadangos, The dominant role of CD8+ dendritic cells in cross-presentation is not
dictated by antigen capture. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103, 1072910734 (2006).
15. K. Shortman, S. H. Naik, Steady-state and inflammatory dendritic-cell development.
Nat. Rev. Immunol. 7, 1930 (2007).
16. J. A. Hamilton, GM-CSF in inflammation and autoimmunity. Trends Immunol. 23, 403408
(2002).
17. M. C. Dieu, B. Vanbervliet, A. Vicari, J. M. Bridon, E. Oldham, S. At-Yahia, F. Brire, A. Zlotnik,
S. Lebecque, C. Caux, Selective recruitment of immature and mature dendritic cells by
distinct chemokines expressed in different anatomic sites. J. Exp. Med. 188, 373386
(1988).
18. G. Dranoff, E. Jaffee, A. Lazenby, P. Golumbek, H. Levitsky, K. Brose, V. Jackson, H. Hamada,
D. Pardoll, R. C. Mulligan, Vaccination with irradiated tumor cells engineered to secrete
murine granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor stimulates potent, specific,
and long-lasting anti-tumor immunity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 90, 35393543 (1993).
19. B. Pulendran, J. Banchereau, S. Burkeholder, E. Kraus, E. Guinet, C. Chalouni, D. Caron,
C. Maliszewski, J. Davoust, J. Fay, K. Palucka, Flt3-ligand and granulocyte colony-stimulating
factor mobilize distinct human dendritic cell subsets in vivo. J. Immunol. 165, 566572
(2000).
20. O. A. Ali, N. Huebsch, L. Cao, G. Dranoff, D. J. Mooney, Infection-mimicking materials to
program dendritic cells in situ. Nat. Mater. 8, 151158 (2009).
21. N. Mach, S. Gillessen, S. B. Wilson, C. Sheehan, M. Mihm, G. Dranoff, Differences in dendritic
cells stimulated in vivo by tumors engineered to secrete granulocyte-macrophage colonystimulating factor or Flt3-ligand. Cancer Res. 60, 32393246 (2000).
22. E. Daro, B. Pulendran, K. Brasel, M. Teepe, D. Pettit, D. H. Lynch, D. Vremec, L. Robb,
K. Shortman, H. J. McKenna, C. R. Maliszewski, E. Maraskovsky, Polyethylene glycolmodified GM-CSF expands CD11b high CD11c high but not CD11blow CD11chigh murine
dendritic cells in vivo: A comparative analysis with Flt3 ligand. J. Immunol. 165, 4958
(2000).
23. C. Fonseca, G. Dranoff, Capitalizing on the immunogenicity of dying tumor cells. Clin. Cancer Res.
14, 16031608 (2008).
24. J. D. Farrar, H. Asnagli, K. M. Murphy, T helper subset development: Roles of instruction,
selection, and transcription. J. Clin. Invest. 109, 431435 (2002).
25. D. Skokos, M. C. Nussenzweig, CD8 DCs induce IL-12independent Th1 differentiation
through Delta 4 Notch-like ligand in response to bacterial LPS. J. Exp. Med. 204, 15251531
(2007).
26. J. M. den Haan, S. M. Lehar, M. J. Bevan, CD8+ but not CD8 dendritic cells cross-prime
cytotoxic T cells in vivo. J. Exp. Med. 192, 16851696 (2000).
27. M. Moser, K. M. Murphy, Dendritic cell regulation of TH1-TH2 development. Nat. Immunol.
1, 199205 (2000).
28. D. Jankovic, M. C. Kullberg, S. Hieny, P. Caspar, C. M. Collazo, A. Sher, In the absence of IL-12,
CD4+ T cell responses to intracellular pathogens fail to default to a Th2 pattern and are host
protective in an IL-10/ setting. Immunity 16, 429439 (2002).
29. V. E. Schijns, B. L. Haagmans, C. M. Wierda, B. Kruithof, I. A. Heijnen, G. Alber, M. C. Horzinek,
Mice lacking IL-12 develop polarized Th1 cells during viral infection. J. Immunol. 160, 39583964
(1998).
30. J. Magram, J. Sfarra, S. Connaughton, D. Faherty, R. Warrier, D. Carvajal, C. Y. Wu, C. Stewart,
U. Sarmiento, M. K. Gately, IL-12-deficient mice are defective but not devoid of type 1 cytokine responses. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 795, 6070 (1996).
www.ScienceTranslationalMedicine.org
25 November 2009
10
RESEARCH ARTICLE