MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4282962127 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2022-572

Abstract 572: Pre-clinical evaluation of Claudin 18.2 TAC T cells for the treatment of gastric cancer

2022· article· en· W4282962127 on OpenAlexaff
Tania Benatar, Ling Wang, Thanyashanthi Nitya-Nootan, Heather MacGregor, Suzanna L. Prosser, Philbert Ip, Prabha Lal, Laura Shaver, Sadhak Sengupta, Christopher W. Helsen, Andreas G. Bader

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCAR-T cell therapy research
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCancer researchCancerClaudinTight junctionIn vivoImmunotherapyCytotoxic T cellMedicineCancer cellImmunologyIn vitroChemistryBiologyInternal medicineBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: The T cell antigen coupler (TAC) is a novel, proprietary chimeric receptor that facilitates the re-direction of T cells to tumor cells and activates T cells by co-opting the endogenous T cell receptor complex with the goal to elicit a safe and durable anti-tumor response. Based on this preclinical pharmacology and toxicology data, TAC01-HER2, a first-in-class TAC T product targeting HER2 (ERBB2), has entered a phase I/II clinical trial in patients with HER2-positive solid tumors. Here, we present the development of a new TAC T product targeting Claudin 18.2 (CLDN18.2) to treat gastric cancer. CLDN18.2 belongs to a family of Claudin tight junction proteins whose expression is naturally exclusive to normal stomach. In gastric cancer cells, however, CLDN18.2 surface expression is upregulated and perturbed, leading to tumor-selective surface expression of CLDN18.2. Thus, CLDN18.2 is a preferred antigen for the specific targeting of tumor cells via TAC T cells. Materials and Methods: CLDN18.2-TAC receptor functionality was characterized using a variety of in vitro and in vivo assays. In vitro assays were based on flow cytometric analysis of TAC surface staining and cytokine release. Cytotoxicity was assessed via luminescence-based co-culture assays and real-time microscopy. In vivo studies examined the anti-tumor effect of TAC-engineered T-cells against established solid CLDN18.2 expressing tumor xenografts. Results: The CLDN18.2-TAC receptor showed strong surface expression and specific activation when co-cultured with a variety of cancer cells expressing CLDN18.2 in vitro. Secretion of IL2, IFNg and TNFa were comparable with cytokine levels produced by activated control TAC T cells. In vitro cytotoxicity assays demonstrated a strong anti-CLDN18.2 response and killing of CLDN18.2 expressing target cell lines. No increases in cytokine levels and no cytotoxicity were observed in non-transduced T cells and CLDN18.2-TAC T cells co-cultured with CLDN18.2-negative target cells, indicating that the T cell response is specific to the CLDN18.2 antigen. Intravenous administration of CLDN18.2-TAC T cells in mice carrying CLDN18.2-positive solid tumor xenografts led to a sustained anti-tumor response. Conclusion: The in vitro and in vivo data confirm strong and specific activity of CLDN18.2-targeted TAC T cells against CLDN18.2-expressing solid tumor models and highlight the versatility of the TAC platform for therapeutic applications in solid tumors. Citation Format: Tania Benatar, Ling Wang, Thanyashanthi Nitya-Nootan, Heather MacGregor, Suzanna Prosser, Philbert Ip, Prabha Lal, Laura Shaver, Sadhak Sengupta, Christopher W. Helsen, Andreas G. Bader. Pre-clinical evaluation of Claudin 18.2 TAC T cells for the treatment of gastric cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr 572.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.400
GPT teacher head0.579
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicCAR-T cell therapy research→French-language works237,207→