Immune Checkpoint Blockade Augments Changes Within Oncolytic Virus-induced Cancer MHC-I Peptidome, Creating Novel Antitumor CD8 T Cell Reactivities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The combination cancer immunotherapies with oncolytic virus (OV) and immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) reinstate otherwise dysfunctional antitumor CD8 T cell responses. One major mechanism that aids such reinstatement of antitumor CD8 T cells involves the availability of new class I major histocompatibility complex (MHC-I)-bound tumor epitopes following therapeutic intervention. Thus, therapy-induced changes within the MHC-I peptidome hold the key to understanding the clinical implications for therapy-reinstated CD8 T cell responses. Here, using mass spectrometry-based immuno-affinity methods and tumor-bearing animals treated with OV and ICB (alone or in combination), we captured the therapy-induced alterations within the tumor MHC-I peptidome, which were then tested for their CD8 T cell response-stimulating activity. We found that the oncolytic reovirus monotherapy drives up- as well as downexpression of tumor MHC-I peptides in a cancer type and oncolysis susceptibility dependent manner. Interestingly, the combination of reovirus + ICB results in higher numbers of differentially expressed MHC-I-associated peptides (DEMHCPs) relative to either monotherapies. Most importantly, OV+ICB-driven DEMHCPs contain biologically active epitopes that stimulate interferon-gamma responses in cognate CD8 T cells, which may mediate clinically desired antitumor attack and cancer immunoediting. These findings highlight that the therapy-induced changes to the MHC-I peptidome contribute toward the reinstated antitumor CD8 T cell attack established following OV + ICB combination cancer immunotherapy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".