MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200266275 · doi:10.1002/hep.32279

Novel low‐avidity glypican‐3 specific CARTs resist exhaustion and mediate durable antitumor effects against HCC

2021· article· en· W4200266275 on OpenAlexaff
Leidy D. Caraballo Galva, Xiaotao Jiang, Mohamed S. Hussein, Huajun Zhang, Rui Mao, Pierce Brody, Yibing Peng, Aiwu Ruth He, Mercy Kehinde‐Ige, Ramses Sadek, Xiangguo Qiu, Huidong Shi, Yukai He

Bibliographic record

VenueHepatology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersGenentechNational Cancer InstituteEisaiBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsAvidityCancer researchMonoclonal antibodyEpitopeAntigenIn vivoImmunologyIn vitroBiologyAntibodyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and Aims Chimeric antigen receptor engineered T cells (CARTs) for HCC and other solid tumors are not as effective as they are for blood cancers. CARTs may lose function inside tumors due to persistent antigen engagement. The aims of this study are to develop low‐affinity monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) and low‐avidity CARTs for HCC and to test the hypothesis that low‐avidity CARTs can resist exhaustion and maintain functions in solid tumors, generating durable antitumor effects. Methods and Results New human glypican‐3 (hGPC3) mAbs were developed from immunized mice. We obtained three hGPC3‐specific mAbs that stained HCC tumors, but not the adjacent normal liver tissues. One of them, 8F8, bound an epitope close to that of GC33, the frequently used high‐affinity mAb, but with approximately 17‐fold lower affinity. We then compared the 8F8 CARTs to GC33 CARTs for their in vitro function and in vivo antitumor effects. In vitro, low‐avidity 8F8 CARTs killed both hGPC3 high and hGPC3 low HCC tumor cells to the same extent as high‐avidity GC33 CARTs. 8F8 CARTs expanded and persisted to a greater extent than GC33 CARTs, resulting in durable responses against HCC xenografts. Importantly, compared with GC33 CARTs, there were 5‐fold more of 8F8‐BBz CARTs in the tumor mass for a longer period of time. Remarkably, the tumor‐infiltrating 8F8 CARTs were less exhausted and apoptotic, and more functional than GC33 CARTs. Conclusion The low‐avidity 8F8‐BBz CART resists exhaustion and apoptosis inside tumor lesions, demonstrating a greater therapeutic potential than high‐avidity CARTs.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.284
Threshold uncertainty score0.870

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHepatologySame topicCAR-T cell therapy researchFrench-language works237,207