MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2946884236 · doi:10.1186/s40425-019-0575-3

CEA expression heterogeneity and plasticity confer resistance to the CEA-targeting bispecific immunotherapy antibody cibisatamab (CEA-TCB) in patient-derived colorectal cancer organoids

2019· article· en· W2946884236 on OpenAlexaff
Reyes Gonzalez-Exposito, Maria Semiannikova, B Griffiths, Khurum Khan, Louise J. Barber, Andrew Woolston, Georgia Spain, Katharina von Loga, Benjamin Challoner, Radhika Patel, Michael Ranes, Amanda Swain, Janet Thomas, Annette Bryant, Claire Saffery, Nicos Fotiadis, Sebastian Guettler, David Mansfield, Alan Melcher, Thomas Powles, Sheela Rao, David Watkins, Ian Chau, Nik Matthews, Fredrik Wållberg, Naureen Starling, David Cunningham, Marco Gerlinger

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer Research
FundersRoche Innovation Center ZurichNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchNIHR Biomedical Research Centre, Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust/Institute of Cancer ResearchSociedad Española de Oncología MédicaCancer Research UKWellcome Trust
KeywordsMedicineColorectal cancerImmunotherapyCancer immunotherapyOrganoidBispecific antibodyCancer researchAntibodyImmunologyCancerMonoclonal antibodyBiologyInternal medicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>Background</h3> The T cell bispecific antibody cibisatamab (CEA-TCB) binds Carcino-Embryonic Antigen (CEA) on cancer cells and CD3 on T cells, which triggers T cell killing of cancer cell lines expressing moderate to high levels of CEA at the cell surface. Patient derived colorectal cancer organoids (PDOs) may more accurately represent patient tumors than established cell lines which potentially enables more detailed insights into mechanisms of cibisatamab resistance and sensitivity. <h3>Methods</h3> We established PDOs from multidrug-resistant metastatic CRCs. CEA expression of PDOs was determined by FACS and sensitivity to cibisatamab immunotherapy was assessed by co-culture of PDOs and allogeneic CD8 T cells. <h3>Results</h3> PDOs could be categorized into 3 groups based on CEA cell-surface expression: CEA<sub>hi</sub> (<i>n</i>&nbsp;= 3), CEA<sub>lo</sub> (<i>n</i>&nbsp;= 1) and CEA<sub>mixed</sub> PDOs (<i>n</i>&nbsp;= 4), that stably maintained populations of CEA<sub>hi</sub> and CEA<sub>lo</sub> cells, which has not previously been described in CRC cell lines. CEA<sub>hi</sub> PDOs were sensitive whereas CEA<sub>lo</sub> PDOs showed resistance to cibisatamab. PDOs with mixed expression showed low sensitivity to cibisatamab, suggesting that CEA<sub>lo</sub> cells maintain cancer cell growth. Culture of FACS-sorted CEA<sub>hi</sub> and CEA<sub>lo</sub> cells from PDOs with mixed CEA expression demonstrated high plasticity of CEA expression, contributing to resistance acquisition through CEA antigen loss. RNA-sequencing revealed increased WNT/β-catenin pathway activity in CEA<sub>lo</sub> cells. Cell surface CEA expression was up-regulated by inhibitors of the WNT/β-catenin pathway. <h3>Conclusions</h3> Based on these preclinical findings, heterogeneity and plasticity of CEA expression appear to confer low cibisatamab sensitivity in PDOs, supporting further clinical evaluation of their predictive effect in CRC. Pharmacological inhibition of the WNT/β-catenin pathway may be a rational combination to sensitize CRCs to cibisatamab. Our novel PDO and T cell co-culture immunotherapy models enable pre-clinical discovery of candidate biomarkers and combination therapies that may inform and accelerate the development of immuno-oncology agents in the clinic.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.322 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations115
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for ImmunoTherapy of CancerSame topicMonoclonal and Polyclonal Antibodies ResearchFrench-language works237,207