Imaging the immune response to monitor tumor immunotherapy

CRISPR/Cas9-mediated knockout strategies for enhancing immunotherapy in breast cancer

Breast cancer, a prevalent disease with significant mortality rates, often presents treatment challenges due to its complex genetic makeup. This review explores the potential of combining Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR)/CRISPR-associated protein 9 (Cas9) gene knockout strategies with immunotherapeutic approaches to enhance breast cancer treatment. The CRISPR/Cas9 system, renowned for its precision in inducing genetic alterations, can target and eliminate specific cancer cells, thereby minimizing off-target effects. Concurrently, immunotherapy, which leverages the immune system's power to combat cancer, has shown promise in treating breast cancer. By integrating these two strategies, we can potentially augment the effectiveness of immunotherapies by knocking out genes that enable cancer cells to evade the immune system. However, safety considerations, such as off-target effects and immune responses, necessitate careful evaluation. Current research endeavors aim to optimize these strategies and ascertain the most effective methods to stimulate the immune response. This review provides novel insights into the integration of CRISPR/Cas9-mediated knockout strategies and immunotherapy, a promising avenue that could revolutionize breast cancer treatment as our understanding of the immune system's interplay with cancer deepens.

Advances of functional nanomaterials for cancer immunotherapeutic applications

Immunotherapy has made great progress by modulating the body's own immune system to fight against cancer cells. However, the low response rates of related drugs limit the development of immunotherapy strategies. Fortunately, the advantages of nanotechnology can just make up for this shortcoming. Nanocarriers of diverse systems are utilized to co-deliver antigens and adjuvants, combined with drugs for immunomodulatory, such as chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and photodynamic. Here we review recent studies on immunotherapy with biomimetic, organic, and inorganic nanomaterials. They are going to potentially overcome the drawbacks in cancer immunotherapy with delivering immunomodulatory drugs, delivering cancer vaccine, and monitoring the immune systems. This article is characterized under: Therapeutic Approaches and Drug Discovery > Nanomedicine for Oncologic Disease.

Current status and future challenges for molecular imaging

Molecular imaging (MI), used in its wider sense of biology at the molecular level, is a field that lies at the intersection of molecular biology and traditional medical imaging. As advances in medicine have exponentially expanded over the last few decades, so has our need to better understand the fundamental behaviour of living organisms in a non-invasive and timely manner. This commentary draws from topics the authors addressed in their presentations at the 2017 Royal Society Meeting 'Challenges for chemistry in molecular imaging', as well as a discussion of where MI is today and where it is heading in the future.This article is part of the themed issue 'Challenges for chemistry in molecular imaging'.

Molecular imaging biomarkers for cell-based immunotherapies

While many decades of scientific research studies have gone into harnessing the power of the immune system to fight cancer, only recently have cancer immunotherapeutic approaches begun to show robust clinical responses in patients with a variety of cancers. These treatments are adding to the current arsenal of cancer treatments; surgery, radiation and chemotherapy, and increasing the therapeutic options for cancer patients. Despite these advances, issues associated with these therapies include that not all patients respond to these therapies, and some patients who respond experience varying degrees of toxicities. One of the major issues affecting immunotherapy is the inability to evaluate trafficking of activated T-cells into sites of tumor. The current diagnostic imaging based on conventional anatomic imaging, which is the mainstay to monitor response to cytotoxic chemotherapy or radiation, is not adequate to assess initial response to immunotherapy or disease evolution. Patients’ prognosis by histological analysis has limited use in regards to immunotherapy. Thus, there is a crucial need for noninvasive biomarkers for screening patients that show long term response to therapy. Here, we provide a brief account of emerging molecular magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers that have potential to exploit the metabolism and metabolic products of activated T cells.

Near-infrared imaging of adoptive immune cell therapy in breast cancer model using cell membrane labeling

The overall objective of this study is to non-invasively image and assess tumor targeting and retention of directly labeled T-lymphocytes following their adoptive transfer in mice. T-lymphocytes obtained from draining lymph nodes of 4T1 (murine breast cancer cell) sensitized BALB/C mice were activated in-vitro with Bryostatin/Ionomycin for 18 hours, and were grown in the presence of Interleukin-2 for 6 days. T-lymphocytes were then directly labeled with 1,1-dioctadecyltetramethyl indotricarbocyanine Iodide (DiR), a lipophilic near infrared fluorescent dye that labels the cell membrane. Assays for viability, proliferation, and function of labeled T-lymphocytes showed that they were unaffected by DiR labeling. The DiR labeled cells were injected via tail vein in mice bearing 4T1 tumors in the flank. In some cases labeled 4T1 specific T-lymphocytes were injected a week before 4T1 tumor cell implantation. Multi-spectral in vivo fluorescence imaging was done to subtract the autofluorescence and isolate the near infrared signal carried by the T-lymphocytes. In recipient mice with established 4T1 tumors, labeled 4T1 specific T-lymphocytes showed marked tumor retention, which peaked 6 days post infusion and persisted at the tumor site for up to 3 weeks. When 4T1 tumor cells were implanted 1-week post-infusion of labeled T-lymphocytes, T-lymphocytes responded to the immunologic challenge and accumulated at the site of 4T1 cell implantation within two hours and the signal persisted for 2 more weeks. Tumor accumulation of labeled 4T1 specific T-lymphocytes was absent in mice bearing Meth A sarcoma tumors. When lysate of 4T1 specific labeled T-lymphocytes was injected into 4T1 tumor bearing mice the near infrared signal was not detected at the tumor site. In conclusion, our validated results confirm that the near infrared signal detected at the tumor site represents the DiR labeled 4T1 specific viable T-lymphocytes and their response to immunologic challenge can be imaged in vivo.

Subcutaneous administration of D-luciferin is an effective alternative to intraperitoneal injection in bioluminescence imaging of xenograft tumors in nude mice

Currently, intraperitoneal (IP) injection of D-luciferin is the preferred method of providing substrate for bioluminescent imaging (BLI); however it has a failure rate of 3-10% due to accidental intestinal injection. The present study evaluates the quality of BLI after subcutaneous (SC) injection of D-luciferin and demonstrates the effectiveness of SC injection in anatomically disparate tumor models. Mice bearing luciferase-expressing tumors underwent BLI after SC or IP injection of D-luciferin. The average time to maximal luminescence was 6 min (range 5-9 min) after SC injection and 8 min (range 5-8 min) after IP injection. Within 7 minutes of injection, SC and IP routes yielded similar luminescence in subcutaneous, intracranial, tongue, and lung xenograft tumor models. In a model of combined subcutaneous and intracranial xenografts, SC injection resulted in proportional luminescence at all sites, confirming that preferential delivery of substrate does not occur. While tumors were occasionally not visualized with IP injection, all tumors were visualized reliably with SC injection. Thus, SC injection of D-luciferin is a convenient and effective alternative to IP injection for BLI in nude mice. It may be a preferable approach, particularly for tumors with weaker signals and/or when greater precision is required.

Trends in cancer immunotherapy

Modulation of the immune system for therapeutic ends has a long history, stretching back to Edward Jenner's use of cowpox to induce immunity to smallpox in 1796. Since then, immunotherapy, in the form of prophylactic and therapeutic vaccines, has enabled doctors to treat and prevent a variety of infectious diseases, including cholera, poliomyelitis, diphtheria, measles and mumps. Immunotherapy is now increasingly being applied to oncology. Cancer immunotherapy attempts to harness the power and specificity of the immune system for the treatment of malignancy. Although cancer cells are less immunogenic than pathogens, the immune system is capable of recognizing and eliminating tumor cells. However, tumors frequently interfere with the development and function of immune responses. Thus, the challenge for cancer immunotherapy is to apply advances in cellular and molecular immunology and develop strategies that effectively and safely augment antitumor responses.