IMMU-21. ELUCIDATING THE CELLULAR MECHANISMS OF THERAPEUTIC BENEFIT UNDERLYING ADOPTIVE CELLULAR THERAPY IN MODELS OF GLIOMA

Abstract

Abstract Among pediatric cancers, malignancies of the brain carry significant morbidity and mortality, harboring dismal prognosis and poor outcomes. Our group has previously shown that adoptive cellular therapy (ACT) provides therapeutic benefit against central nervous system (CNS) malignancies, including medulloblastoma and high-grade glioma. In this study, we characterized cell cycling differences of immune sub-populations in peripheral lymphoid and tumor tissue compartments in vivo. ACT was conducted in orthotopic KR158 luciferase tumor-bearing mice, a syngeneic murine glioma model. Five days following intracranial implantation of tumor cells, mice were treated with ACT which included the following elements: total body irradiation, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, one dose of tumor-activated splenocytes and three weekly doses of dendritic cells that had been electroporated with tumor-derived ribonucleic acid. One week after the completion of ACT, bromodeoxyuridine (BRDU) was administered to mice 12-hours prior to tissue collection and flow cytometry was utilized to measure the level of BRDU incorporation. 7-aminoactinomycin-D was used in conjunction with BRDU to provide insight into all phases of the cell cycle. We observed significant differences in cycling populations of myeloid derived suppressor cells (MDSC) and T-cells. In ACT-treated-mice, MDSCs found in secondary lymphoid tissues were significantly more proliferative. In the tumor microenvironment (TME), proliferating MDSCs were significantly reduced compared to mice that did not receive treatment. Frequencies of proliferating CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells were significantly increased in cervical lymph node and TME but reduced in spleen. These findings suggest that ACT alters immune cycling in peripheral lymphoid tissues and TME to potentially promote antitumor T-cell responses and minimize MDSC-mediated immunosuppression. While ACT-mediated alterations to immune cell cycling are likely a major contributor to the therapy’s benefit, it is unlikely to be the sole mechanism. Further exploration into other functional pathways, namely migration, is needed to explain changes to immune populations following ACT.