Skip to main content
  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

AACR logo

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
    • CME
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CCR Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Breast Cancer
      • Clinical Trials
      • Immunotherapy: Facts and Hopes
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

  • AACR Publications
    • Blood Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Discovery
    • Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
    • Cancer Immunology Research
    • Cancer Prevention Research
    • Cancer Research
    • Clinical Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Research
    • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics

User menu

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Log out
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Clinical Cancer Research
Clinical Cancer Research
  • Home
  • About
    • The Journal
    • AACR Journals
    • Subscriptions
    • Permissions and Reprints
    • Reviewing
    • CME
  • Articles
    • OnlineFirst
    • Current Issue
    • Past Issues
    • CCR Focus Archive
    • Meeting Abstracts
    • Collections
      • COVID-19 & Cancer Resource Center
      • Breast Cancer
      • Clinical Trials
      • Immunotherapy: Facts and Hopes
      • Editors' Picks
      • "Best of" Collection
  • For Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Author Services
    • Best of: Author Profiles
    • Submit
  • Alerts
    • Table of Contents
    • Editors' Picks
    • OnlineFirst
    • Citation
    • Author/Keyword
    • RSS Feeds
    • My Alert Summary & Preferences
  • News
    • Cancer Discovery News
  • COVID-19
  • Webinars
  • Search More

    Advanced Search

CCR Focus

Agonist Antibodies to TNFR Molecules That Costimulate T and NK Cells

Ignacio Melero, Daniel Hirschhorn-Cymerman, Aizea Morales-Kastresana, Miguel F. Sanmamed and Jedd D. Wolchok
Ignacio Melero
1Centro de Investigación Médica Aplicada (CIMA), and Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain; and 2Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel Hirschhorn-Cymerman
1Centro de Investigación Médica Aplicada (CIMA), and Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain; and 2Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Aizea Morales-Kastresana
1Centro de Investigación Médica Aplicada (CIMA), and Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain; and 2Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Miguel F. Sanmamed
1Centro de Investigación Médica Aplicada (CIMA), and Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain; and 2Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jedd D. Wolchok
1Centro de Investigación Médica Aplicada (CIMA), and Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Pamplona, Navarra, Spain; and 2Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-2065 Published March 2013
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

This article has a correction. Please see:

  • Correction: Agonist Antibodies to TNFR Molecules That Costimulate T and NK Cells - April 2, 2013

Abstract

Therapy for cancer can be achieved by artificially stimulating antitumor T and natural killer (NK) lymphocytes with agonist monoclonal antibodies (mAb). T and NK cells express several members of the TNF receptor (TNFR) family specialized in delivering a costimulatory signal on their surface. Engagement of these receptors is typically associated with proliferation, elevated effector functions, resistance to apoptosis, and differentiation into memory cells. These receptors lack any intrinsic enzymatic activity and their signal transduction relies on associations with TNFR-associated factor (TRAF) adaptor proteins. Stimulation of CD137 (4-1BB), CD134 (OX40), and glucocorticoid-induced TNFR (GITR; CD357) promotes impressive tumor-rejecting immunity in a variety of murine tumor models. The mechanisms of action depend on a complex interplay of CTL, T-helper cells, regulatory T cells, dendritic cells, and vascular endothelium in tumors. Agonist mAbs specific for CD137 have shown signs of objective clinical activity in patients with metastatic melanoma, whereas anti-OX40 and anti-GITR mAbs have entered clinical trials. Preclinical evidence suggests that engaging TNFR members would be particularly active with conventional cancer therapies and additional immunotherapeutic approaches. Indeed, T-cell responses elicited to tumor antigens by means of immunogenic tumor cell death are amplified by these immunostimulatory agonist mAbs. Furthermore, anti-CD137 mAbs have been shown to enhance NK-mediated cytotoxicity elicited by rituximab and trastuzumab. Combinations with other immunomodulatory mAb that block T-cell checkpoint blockade receptors such as CTLA-4 and PD-1 are also promising. Clin Cancer Res; 19(5); 1044–53. ©2013 AACR.

Introduction

TNF receptor family members provide costimulation to T and NK cells

Lymphocyte activation integrates multiple signals carried and delivered across immune synapses. Critical signals for activation are dependent on specific antigens, such as T-cell antigen receptor (TCR) ligation on T cells or on recognition of antibody-coated target cells sensed by FcRγIII (CD16) on natural killer (NK) cells. Costimulatory molecules will subsequently determine the outcome of the primary antigen recognition by providing signals that will amplify, complement, and modulate those elicited from the TCR or CD16. Costimulation (1) is therefore a pathway of intercellular communication that depends on the expression of complementary glycoproteins on the surface of interacting cells.

Four families of molecules play important roles in immune synapses: the immunoglobulin superfamily, the integrin superfamily, C-type lectins, and the TNF/TNF receptor (TNFR) families. Receptor–ligand interactions in the immune synapse are important for maintaining structure (adhesion), conveying bidirectional biochemical signals for activation or inhibition, reorganizing the cytoskeleton, and reorienting the secretory machinery. The role of the costimulatory members of the TNFR family seems to be related to signaling. However, it should be noted that many molecular players are acting in a structured and concerted fashion at the synapse including receptors, signaling adaptors, cytoskeletal components, and the distribution of lipids in the interacting plasma membranes (2).

T and NK cells express a panoply of cell surface members belonging to the TNFR family (Fig. 1 and Table 1). Some TNFR members such as CD27 are constitutively expressed. However, the expression of other members such as CD137, OX40, and glucocorticoid-induced TNFR (GITR) are expressed at low levels or not at all in the resting state but are upregulated upon activation (color-coded in Fig. 1). The respective ligands for the TNFR molecules are type II transmembrane proteins, primarily expressed in antigen-presenting cells such as macrophages, dendritic cells, and activated B cells (3, 4). Structural studies have shown that TNFR ligands form trimmers and multimerization is essential for cross-linking the receptors (4, 5).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Cell surface–attached costimulatory members of the TNF and TNFR superfamilies. Schematic receptor–ligand pair interactions of the costimulatory members of the TNF and TNFR families at immune synapses. Receptors are color-coded for activation-dependent inducibility and the family of molecules is shape-coded. Plus (+), minus (−), and question mark (?) signs placed at the side of the arrows indicate activatory and inhibitory signals or unknown functional effects. The TNF family with at least 18 described members and TNFR family that encompasses at least 27 members play functions in many other biologic functions beyond costimulation (Table 1) of T and NK responses. It is well known that some of the TNF members act as cell surface–attached molecules and some as soluble cytokines that in some cases can heterotrimerize. Soluble forms of the costimulatory members depicted in the figure have been described but their functional importance remains elusive. We can classify TNFR family members depending on the presence absence of a death domain in the cytoplasmic tail. This death domain recruits apoptosis inducing molecules upon ligation of the receptor and is absent from the costimulatory members whose main function is to convey proinflamatory and activatory signals. The pair CD40/CD40 ligand has not been included, as the main role of CD40 is activating antigen-presenting cells, and has been reviewed in detail in an accompanying review (100).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 1.

Members of TNFR superfamily

Knockout mice for TNFR molecules and their ligands show relatively mild phenotypes with partial loss in the ability to fight viral infections controlled by cellular immune response (6). However, cells artificially exposed to a TNFR stimulus via monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) show a highly activated phenotype. Most of the basic knowledge of the TNFR molecules comes from T-cell studies, but additional cell lineages such as NK cells and myeloid cells are known to express TNFR molecules. While the primary function of TNFR family is to provide adequate costimulation, back-signaling by the ligands can convey proinflammatory stimuli (7). Therefore, using artificial ligands such as mAb to engage TNFR molecules forces the receptor system to a point that probably is never reached under physiologic conditions when these molecules are acting confined to immune synapses during transient cell–cell interactions (8).

These families of receptor–ligand pairs are susceptible to multiple layers of regulation because of the following mechanistic facts:

  1. The level of surface expression depends on the activation state of the lymphocyte: for the immunomodulatory mAb to be effective, expression of the target molecule on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes or other antitumor T cells is critical.

  2. Differential expression, distribution, and function on naïve versus memory T-cell subsets.

  3. Differential recruitment to the cytoplasmic tail of members of the TNFR-associated factor (TRAF) family of signaling adaptors whose expression is also regulated upon activation.

  4. The level of expression of the ligands is controlled by the activation/maturation state of the antigen-presenting cells.

  5. The existence and regulation of negative feedback mechanisms such as deubiquitinases and phosphatases that quench signals from the receptors.

TNFR family member signaling in immune cells

The immunologic outcome of costimulation can be determined by the nature and intensity of reversible biochemical signals. Specifically, integrated signals from multiple accessory receptors dictate, in a coordinated fashion, the intensity, duration, and quality of the immune response (1). Most costimulatory signaling is regulated at the transcriptional level; however, additional mechanisms such as chromatin remodeling, stability of mRNAs, and miRNAs are very likely to play a role.

The TNFR family is a large group of over 27 members that share sequence homology with the TNF and lymphotoxin receptors (Table 1). Some of the members of the TNFR family were originally discovered in T cells (Fig. 1). Biochemically, TNFR family member signaling begins by multimerization of the receptors that eventually lead to the formation of multiprotein complexes important for conveying downstream signaling (9, 10). The cytoplasmic tail of these molecules contains TRAF-binding domains that recruit TRAFs upon receptor–ligand binding (Fig. 2). TRAF2, TRAF1, and TRAF5 are the primary TRAF adaptors reported to interact with the intracellular tails of the costimulatory receptors of the TNFR family (CD137, CD134, and GITR; ref. 11). In addition, TRAF3 and TRAF6 may play a role for some of these receptors (12). TRAF molecules form heterodimers that associate with the receptors and signaling from homo and heterotrimers reportedly has different quantitative and qualitative outcomes (11). For instance, TRAF1 is upregulated upon T-cell activation and would displace homotrimers of TRAF2 generating TRAF2:TRAF1 heterotrimers with functional consequences.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Early signal transduction events from CD137. Schematic representation of TRAF2 and TRAF1 recruitment by CD137 surface molecules perturbed by the natural ligand or agonist mAb. TRAF2 has associated ubiquitin ligase activity (E3) that dictates self-ubiquitination and presumably ubiquitination of other protein targets. These events lead to recruitment of TAB1/2-TAK1 complexes that downstream activate NF-κB and MAPK. Signals controlled or modulated by TRAF1 are less well understood. K63 polyubiquitin chains are removed by deubiquitinases (i.e., CYLD and A20), which keep the pathway under control, and therefore offer potential therapeutic targets.

TRAF2 has been reported to exert E3 ubiquitin ligase activity through its RING domain (refs. 13, 14; Fig. 2). TRAF2 is constitutively associated with cIAP1 and 2, which are endowed with E3 ubiquitin ligase activities (15). Upon ligation of the TNFR molecules, TRAF2-associated E3 activity forms polyubiquitin chains linked via their lysine 63 residue (16). These polyubiquitins become attached to TRAF2 and additional protein substrates and may act as second messengers. K-63-polyubiquitins act as docking sites for downstream signaling molecules through recruitment of the TAB1/2-TAK1 complexes that ultimately activate the mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathway to form Fos/Jun AP1 transcription factors. In addition, polyubiquitination promotes NEMO- IKK-β complexes to unleash the canonical NF-κB pathway transcription factors (Fig. 2). K63 ubiquitin chains are kept at bay by specific deubiquitinases such as CYLD and A20 whose functional control is not well understood (ref. 17; Fig. 2). It is clear, however, that the deficiency of these enzymes in mice causes autoimmunity and hyperinflammation. TRAF5 also contains a RING ubiquitin ligase catalytic domain and presumably operates in a similar manner. TRAF1 is induced upon T-cell activation and complexes with the receptor. Even though the biochemical functions of TRAF1 are not well understood (18), this adaptor is known to be critical for optimal T-cell memory (19).

CD137-based cancer immunotherapy

CD137 (4-1BB, TNFRSF9) is a surface protein originally discovered on activated, but not resting, T cells by Kwon and Weissman (20, 21). CD137 has only one confirmed ligand (CD137-Ligand, TNFSF9) expressed primarily on macrophages, activated B cells, and dendritic cells. In the mouse, NK cells express CD137 when activated by cytokines in contrast to human cells in which surface expression requires ligation of CD16 (22). Expression of CD137 is also found on activated B cells, dendritic cells, myeloid precursors, mast cells, and endothelial cells in tumors or inflamed tissues (8). CD137 and CD137-Ligand deficiency do not cause an overt immune deficiency but only mild alterations in T-cell activation and memory. Mice deficient in CD137 signaling weakly control virulent viral infections (23, 24).

CD137 agonists such as mAb and soluble forms of the ligand have been shown to enhance cytokine production, proliferation, and cytolytic effector functions, and protect lymphocytes from programmed cell death by upregulating BCL-xL and downregulating B-cell lymphoma 2 interacting mediator of cell death (25, 26). CD137 is also expressed by activated regulatory T cells (Treg) and ligation of CD137 on Tregs limits the suppressive function by a mechanism yet to be elucidated (27). Paradoxically, CD137 ligation on Tregs can cause promitogenic effects. Importantly, ligation of CD137 on NK cells enhances cytokine release (including IFN-γ; ref. 28) and potentiates antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC; refs. 29, 30).

CD137 ligation was first used to treat mouse tumors by means of agonist antibodies (31). As a monotherapy, CD137 mAbs are effective in controlling tumor growth or promoting complete rejection in a variety of transplantable rodent tumors including sarcomas, matocytomas, colon carcinomas, and lymphomas. The mechanism clearly involves enhancement of CTL function (31, 32) and cross-priming of tumor antigens by dendritic cells (ref. 33; Fig. 3). Interestingly, CD4+ T cells seem to be first stimulated and then eliminated by activation-induced cell death (AICD; ref. 34). This is one of the explanations for the paradox that the very same mAbs, which successfully treat tumors, can ameliorate autoimmune diseases by removing autoreactive CD4+ T lymphocytes (35).

Figure 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 3.

Schematic representation of the sites and cells on which agonist anti-CD137 mAbs act as example of TNFR mAb mechanism. The main mechanism of action is costimulation of CD8+ CTLs cross-primed by dendritic cell against tumor antigens. CD137 expression on dendritic cells, activated CD4 T cells (including Tregs), and on tumor blood and lymphatic vessels could offer additional sites and mechanisms of action. Similar mode of action settings can be envisioned for other TNFR members suitable for targeted cancer immunotherapy.

Recent reports have shown that CD137 is present on the surface of capillaries in the tumor bed but not in healthy vasculature. One of the reasons hypothesized for the ectopic CD137 expression on vascular cells is hypoxia (36). CD137, on endothelial cells, promotes leukocyte infiltration by upregulating the expression of adhesion molecules. Interestingly, CD137 expression by effector and Treg in the tumor microenvironment is dependent on the hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α) pathway, which senses hypoxia. Local costimulation may be effective in treating tumors because of the selective CD137 expression at this hypoxic peritumoral location. This point opens up the possibility for local or targeted delivery of CD137 agonists (37).

Apart from immunostimulatory mAbs, CD137-based immunotherapy has been achieved by transfecting tumor cells to express CD137 ligand (38) or membrane-bound single chain antibodies (39). Multimerizing RNA aptamers (but not monomers), binding selectively to CD137, have also shown antitumor efficacy (40), particularly when targeted to surface tumor antigens (41).

A potentially promising aspect of anti-CD137 mAb immunotherapy is combination with other treatments (both conventional and immunotherapeutic). Combination with chemotherapy (42, 43) and radiotherapy (44) is clearly synergistic in preclinical models and likely dependent on eliciting immunogenic cell death with subsequent cross-priming of tumor antigens. Synergistic combinations with vaccines (45) and virotherapy (46, 47) also rely on the principle that CD137 costimulation must act on ongoing tumor-specific immune responses encompassing CD137+ activated lymphocytes. Recently, some intriguing preclinical studies have shown that anti-CD137 mAb therapy synergizes with NK-mediated ADCC elicited by antibodies targeting the surface antigens CD20 or HER-2 (30, 48).

Preclinical toxicity of CD137 ligation, mainly mediated by polyclonal T-cell infiltrates in the liver (dominated by CD8 T cells), results in mild and reversible transaminase elevations (49). In addition, TNF-α–mediated myelosupression has been reported (49, 50). Fully human and chimeric mAbs against CD137 have been produced (BMS-663513, PF-05082566, GTC biotherapeutics). These reagents effectively upregulate cellular immune functions and show tolerable toxicity levels in non-human primates (51).

Clinical trials have only been carried out to completion with BMS-663513 (Table 2). This drug has been used in phase I and in multiple-dose phase II clinical trials. Indications of objective clinical activity in melanoma were reported (50). About 10% of the patients developed liver inflammation limiting treatment and 2 fatalities were reported because of liver toxicity at doses greater 1 mg/kg. This speaks to the need to reconsider dose ranges for agonist antibodies, which likely require lower doses for efficacy compared with antagonist antibodies. Both BMS and Pfizer have resumed clinical trials, implementing dose-escalation studies that focus on safety (NCT01471210 and NCT01307267).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2.

Clinical trials with antiCD137, antiOX40, antiCD27, and antiGITR mAb

In the trial with PF-05082566 sponsored by Pfizer (NCT01307267), a combination with rituximab is formally planned as an extension to exploit the ADCC-potentiating effect. If active and safe doses are clinically defined, this will open opportunities for local delivery and combinatorial approaches.

OX40-based cancer immunotherapy

OX40 (CD134 or TNFRSF4) is a costimulatory molecule discovered on the surface of activated CD4+ T cells in rats (52). Expression of OX40 was later found to be restricted to activated CD4+ T cells 24 to 72 hours after TCR engagement. Subsequent studies revealed that OX40 is also found on CD8+ T lymphocytes and other cells such as NK, NKT, and neutrophils (53). CD4+ Foxp3+ Tregs constitutively express OX40 in mice, but human cells upregulate its expression.

Signaling through OX40 increases T-cell survival, promotes clonal expansion, and augments proinflammatory cytokine production (54). Ligation of OX40 is known to recruit TRAF2 and TRAF3, leading to activation of the canonical and noncanonical NF-κB pathways (55, 56). OX40-mediated NF-κB activation subsequently leads to enhanced expression of antiapoptotic molecules such as Bcl-2, Bcl-xl, and survivin, which provide the basis for clonal expansion and expanded memory pool of activated T cells (57).

Given that OX40 engagement can expand T-cell populations, promote cytokine secretion, and support T-cell memory, agonists including mAbs and soluble forms of OX40L have been used successfully in a variety of preclinical tumor models. The first studies, in which anti-OX40 antibodies showed antitumor activity, were pioneered by Weinberg and colleagues. Mirroring early studies where mAbs recognizing inhibitory and costimulatory molecules induce tumor immunity in rodents [anti-CTLA4 and 4-1BB (31, 58)], an anti-OX40 antibody was shown to be effective in a number of tumor models including MC303 sarcomas, CT26 colon carcinomas, SM1 breast cancer, and small B16 melanoma (59). Subsequent studies confirmed these observations in additional preclinical models (60–62).

As a monotherapy, OX40 engagement has been effective in eradicating primarily immunogenic tumors, while failing to provide adequate antitumor immunity in established and more clinically relevant poorly immunogenic tumors. Therefore, a variety of combinatorial strategies to increase anti-OX40 antibody therapy have been explored. Given that OX40 ligation upregulates cytokine receptors on T cells, OX40 antibodies synergize with cytokines such as interleukin (IL)-2 or IL-12 alone or with vaccination (63, 64). Combining OX40 agonists with granulocyte macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF)–secreting syngeneic irradiated tumor cells or DNA vaccination promotes the expansion of tumor-specific T cells, leading to protection or eradication of established cancers [Murata and colleagues (65) and unpublished data]. Furthermore, anti-OX40 antibodies have been combined with other clinically relevant mAbs against inhibitory and costimulatory molecules to treat lymphomas and sarcomas (66, 67).

Modalities with direct cytolytic capability, such as chemotherapy or radiation, have proven particularly effective in treating established tumors when used concomitantly with OX40 agonists (68, 69). In combination with cyclophosphamide, engagement of OX40 not only expands antitumor T-effector cells but also reduces Foxp3+ Tregs by promoting activation-induced cell death. Of interest, elimination and deactivation of Tregs by anti-OX40 antibodies has been important in the antitumor response in some preclinical models (62, 68, 70, 71). Furthermore, given that OX40 ligation can potently stimulate CD4+ T cells, adoptive transfer of antimelanoma CD4+ T cells can eliminate very advanced melanomas when combined with an anti-OX40 antibody and cyclophosphamide. The potency of the therapy is in part attributed to the newly described ability of OX40 engagement to trigger a cytolytic program in CD4+ T cells (72, 73).

Given the substantial evidence from mouse models showing that OX40 agonists can potentiate an antitumor immune response in multiple settings, a clinical grade reagent is now being developed and tested. A mouse anti-human OX40 mAb has shown activity in non-human primates with induction of enlarged lymph nodes and spleens and increased T-cell responses (74). This antibody was further tested in phase I clinical trials in 30 patients where the mouse anti-human OX40 antibody was given on days 1, 3, and 5 at 0.1, 0.4, and 2.0 mg/kg (Table 2). The antibody was well tolerated with minimal toxicity and observation of some tumor size reduction, although none of the patients showed an objective response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. However, specific proliferation and activation of T cells against keyhole limpet hemocyanin (KLH) or tetanus toxin were observed when these model antigens were coinjected the anti-OX40 antibodies (75). Given that patients showed elevated levels of neutralizing human anti-mouse antibodies, the clinical effectiveness of this antibody is significantly limited. For that reason, humanized anti-OX40 antibodies are being prepared for future clinical trials.

GITR-based cancer immunotherapy

The GITR (TNFRSF18) was originally discovered in T-cell hybridomas that were treated with dexamethasone (76). Glucocorticoid treatment, however, was later shown to have no effect on GITR expression in human T cells and was not necessary in mice (77, 78). GITR is upregulated in T cells 24 to 72 hours after activation, although basal expression of GITR is found both in human and mouse T cells (79). GITR expression has also been found in NK cells, eosinophils, basophils, macrophages, and B cells, particularly upon activation (80).

Similarly to OX40 and CD137, GITR modulates T-cell activation by providing a costimulatory signal. Unique for a TNFR family member, GITR signals through a complex of a single TRAF5 and TRAF2 molecules, suggesting a nonredundant role for this molecule (11). GITR, as a costimulatory molecule, increases proliferation, activation, and cytokine production of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells after TCR engagement. Furthermore, it seems that GITR engagement supports a T-helper 1 cell (TH1) response in CD4+ T cells in a variety of disease models (80).

Initial studies with an agonist monoclonal rat anti-mouse GITR antibody (DTA-1) show that it can potently stimulate effector T cells, while decreasing the suppressive function of Treg leading to autoimmunity (81–83). Subsequently, it was shown that DTA-1 overrides the suppressive effects of Tregs on T-effector cells (84). Thus, anti-GITR can potentially overcome tolerance to self- and tumor-antigens, making it an attractive target for development as a cancer immunotherapy. Indeed, DTA-1 has been shown to be effective in treating small-established B16 tumors (85, 86) and 8-day established Meth-A sarcomas (87), CT26 (88), and A20 lymphoma (unpublished data). An interesting antitumor property of DTA-1 is its capacity to promote concomitant immunity (89), suggesting the potential for GITR-induced tumor immunity in treating metastatic disease.

DTA-1 has also been successful as an immunologic adjuvant in variety of combinatorial settings. Notably, DTA-1 has shown to substantially enhance the potency of xenogenic DNA vaccines in a melanoma model in which protection is marginal (90). Similarly, dendritic cells engineered to express a melanoma antigen showed higher therapeutic potency when coadministered with DTA-1 or when dendritic cells are engineered to secrete DTA-1 or soluble GITRL (91). Moreover, an adenovirus-based vaccine against human papillomavirus failed to provide complete protection unless it was combined with GITR engagement (92).

A humanized agonist anti-human GITR mAb (TRX518) has been developed by Tolerex Inc. (now GITR Inc), and similarly to DTA-1, provides potent costimulation to human lymphocytes in vitro. A dose-escalation phase I clinical trial has been initiated at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (New York, NY) using TRX518 (Table 2).

Future Perspective

While it is clear that agonist antibodies against members of TNFR family can significantly increase antitumor immune responses based on preclinical data, these agents are not realistically expected to induce complete regressions in patients with cancer as monotherapies. Therefore, combinatorial modalities should be explored in future clinical trials. One attractive strategy is to combine cytolytic chemotherapeutic agents with TNFR agonists. In addition to directly killing tumor cells, these agents can lead to release of self-antigens and TLR agonists that can expand antitumor T cells. In one study, stereotactic radiation is being combined with anti-OX40 in patients with metastatic breast cancer (NCT01642290). Furthermore, anti-OX40 is being combined with cyclophosphamide and radiation in patients with metastatic prostate cancer (NCT01303705).

Another interesting approach is the combination of agonist anti-TNFR antibodies in combination with checkpoint-blockading antibodies, such as anti-CTLA-4 (ipilimumab) or anti-PD-1 (93). Anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 have shown antitumor activity in about 20% to 30% of patients tested (94–98). Given the nonredundant signaling of the TNFR and checkpoint blockade pathways, it is conceivable that combinations of agonist and antagonist antibodies against these pathways can synergize to yield higher response rates.

Safety is a concern when considering agonist immunomodulatory antibody therapy. While the phase I anti-human OX40 antibody was well tolerated with low toxicity, trials of anti-CD137 mAb were temporarily suspended after fatal hepatic events were observed. Such studies have now been successfully reopened using lower doses of agonist antibody therapy. Conversely, in some models, the use of TNFR antibodies can cause hyperactivation and death of antigen-specific effector T cells (99, 90) with the potential of hampering antitumor immunity. Therefore, careful design of future clinical trials, identification of biomarkers, and lessons from preclinical studies will be necessary to guide future therapies in our quest to develop potent and well-tolerated treatments.

Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of interest

I. Melero has a commercial research grant, honoraria from speakers bureau, and is a consultant/advisory board member of Bristol Myers Squibb. J.D. Wolchok has a commercial research grant from Novartis and Bristol-Myers Squibb and is a consultant/advisory board member of Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck. No potential conflicts of interest were disclosed by the other authors.

Authors' Contributions

Conception and design: I. Melero, D. Hirschhorn-Cymerman, A. Morales-Kastresana, M.F. Sanmamed, J.D. Wolchok

Acquisition of data (provided animals, acquired and managed patients, provided facilities, etc.): J.D. Wolchok

Analysis and interpretation of data (e.g., statistical analysis, biostatistics, computational analysis): J.D. Wolchok

Writing, review, and/or revision of the manuscript: I. Melero, D. Hirschhorn-Cymerman, M.F. Sanmamed, J.D. Wolchok

Administrative, technical, or material support (i.e., reporting or organizing data, constructing databases): M.F. Sanmamed

Study supervision: J.D. Wolchok

Grant Support

J.D. Wolchok and D. Hirschhorn-Cymerman are supported by National Cancer Institute (R01 CA56821, P01 CA33049, and P01 CA59350), Swim Across America, the Lita Annenberg Hazen Foundation, the T.J. Martell Foundation, the Mr. William H. Goodwin and Mrs. Alice Goodwin and the Commonwealth Cancer Foundation for Research, the Ludwig Trust, and the Experimental Therapeutics Center of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. I. Melero receives a grant (SAF2011-22831) from Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad and from UTE for project CIMA. M.F. Sanmamed receives a Rio Hortega contract and A. Morales-Kastresana a FPI scholarship, both from Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad.

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Drs. Stacie Goldberg, David Feltquate, and Maria Jure-Kunkel for scientific discussions.

  • Received September 25, 2012.
  • Revision received January 14, 2013.
  • Accepted January 15, 2013.
  • ©2013 American Association for Cancer Research.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Zhu Y,
    2. Yao S,
    3. Chen L
    . Cell surface signaling molecules in the control of immune responses: a tide model. Immunity 2011;34:466–78.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. 2.↵
    1. Dustin ML,
    2. Depoil D
    . New insights into the T cell synapse from single molecule techniques. Nat Rev Immunol 2011;11:672–84.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Croft M
    . The role of TNF superfamily members in T-cell function and diseases. Nat Rev Immunol 2009;9:271–85.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. An H-J,
    2. Kim YJ,
    3. Song DH,
    4. Park BS,
    5. Kim HM,
    6. Lee JD,
    7. et al.
    Crystallographic and mutational analysis of the CD40-CD154 complex and its implications for receptor activation. J Biol Chem 2011;286:11226–35.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Won E-Y,
    2. Cha K,
    3. Byun J-S,
    4. Kim D-U,
    5. Shin S,
    6. Ahn B,
    7. et al.
    The structure of the trimer of human 4-1BB ligand is unique among members of the tumor necrosis factor superfamily. J Biol Chem 2010;285:9202–10.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Watts TH
    . TNF/TNFR family members in costimulation of T cell responses. Annu Rev Immunol 2005;23:23–68.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Shao Z,
    2. Schwarz H
    . CD137 ligand, a member of the tumor necrosis factor family, regulates immune responses via reverse signal transduction. J Leukoc Biol 2011;89:21–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Melero I,
    2. Murillo O,
    3. Dubrot J,
    4. Hervás-Stubbs S,
    5. Perez-Gracia JL
    . Multi-layered action mechanisms of CD137 (4-1BB)-targeted immunotherapies. Trends Pharmacol Sci 2008;29:383–90.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Wu H
    . Assembly of post-receptor signaling complexes for the tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily. Adv Protein Chem 2004;68:225–79.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Chattopadhyay K,
    2. Ramagopal UA,
    3. Mukhopadhaya A,
    4. Malashkevich VN,
    5. Dilorenzo TP,
    6. Brenowitz M,
    7. et al.
    Assembly and structural properties of glucocorticoid-induced TNF receptor ligand: implications for function. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2007;104:19452–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Snell LM,
    2. Lin GHY,
    3. McPherson AJ,
    4. Moraes TJ,
    5. Watts TH
    . T-cell intrinsic effects of GITR and 4-1BB during viral infection and cancer immunotherapy. Immunol Rev 2011;244:197–217.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Hauer J,
    2. Püschner S,
    3. Ramakrishnan P,
    4. Simon U,
    5. Bongers M,
    6. Federle C,
    7. et al.
    TNF receptor (TNFR)-associated factor (TRAF) 3 serves as an inhibitor of TRAF2/5-mediated activation of the noncanonical NF-kappaB pathway by TRAF-binding TNFRs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2005;102:2874–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  13. 13.↵
    1. Martinez-Forero I,
    2. Rouzaut A,
    3. Palazon A,
    4. Dubrot J,
    5. Melero I
    . Lysine 63 polyubiquitination in immunotherapy and in cancer-promoting inflammation. Clin Cancer Res 2009;15:6751–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Alvarez SE,
    2. Harikumar KB,
    3. Hait NC,
    4. Allegood J,
    5. Strub GM,
    6. Kim EY,
    7. et al.
    Sphingosine-1-phosphate is a missing cofactor for the E3 ubiquitin ligase TRAF2. Nature 2010;465:1084–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Samuel T,
    2. Welsh K,
    3. Lober T,
    4. Togo SH,
    5. Zapata JM,
    6. Reed JC
    . Distinct BIR domains of cIAP1 mediate binding to and ubiquitination of tumor necrosis factor receptor-associated factor 2 and second mitochondrial activator of caspases. J Biol Chem 2006;281:1080–90.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Bhoj VG,
    2. Chen ZJ
    . Ubiquitylation in innate and adaptive immunity. Nature 2009;458:430–7.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Ahmed N,
    2. Zeng M,
    3. Sinha I,
    4. Polin L,
    5. Wei W-Z,
    6. Rathinam C,
    7. et al.
    The E3 ligase Itch and deubiquitinase Cyld act together to regulate Tak1 and inflammation. Nat Immunol 2011;12:1176–83.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. McPherson AJ,
    2. Snell LM,
    3. Mak TW,
    4. Watts TH
    . Opposing roles for TRAF1 in the alternative versus classical NF-κB pathway in T cells. J Biol Chem 2012;287:23010–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. 19.↵
    1. Wang C,
    2. McPherson AJ,
    3. Jones RB,
    4. Kawamura KS,
    5. Lin GHY,
    6. Lang PA,
    7. et al.
    Loss of the signaling adaptor TRAF1 causes CD8+ T cell dysregulation during human and murine chronic infection. J Exp Med 2012;209:77–91.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  20. 20.↵
    1. Pollok KE,
    2. Kim YJ,
    3. Zhou Z,
    4. Hurtado J,
    5. Kim KK,
    6. Pickard RT,
    7. et al.
    Inducible T cell antigen 4-1BB. Analysis of expression and function. J Immunol 1993;150:771–81.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  21. 21.↵
    1. Kwon BS,
    2. Weissman SM
    . cDNA sequences of two inducible T-cell genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1989;86:1963–7.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Lin W,
    2. Voskens CJ,
    3. Zhang X,
    4. Schindler DG,
    5. Wood A,
    6. Burch E,
    7. et al.
    Fc-dependent expression of CD137 on human NK cells: insights into «agonistic» effects of anti-CD137 monoclonal antibodies. Blood 2008;112:699–707.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  23. 23.↵
    1. Tan JT,
    2. Whitmire JK,
    3. Ahmed R,
    4. Pearson TC,
    5. Larsen CP
    . 4-1BB ligand, a member of the TNF family, is important for the generation of antiviral CD8 T cell responses. J Immunol 1999;163:4859–68.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Kwon BS,
    2. Hurtado JC,
    3. Lee ZH,
    4. Kwack KB,
    5. Seo SK,
    6. Choi BK,
    7. et al.
    Immune responses in 4-1BB (CD137)-deficient mice. J Immunol 2002;168:5483–90.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  25. 25.↵
    1. Kroon HM,
    2. Li Q,
    3. Teitz-Tennenbaum S,
    4. Whitfield JR,
    5. Noone A-M,
    6. Chang AE
    . 4-1BB costimulation of effector T cells for adoptive immunotherapy of cancer: involvement of Bcl gene family members. J Immunother 2007;30:406–16.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  26. 26.↵
    1. Sabbagh L,
    2. Pulle G,
    3. Liu Y,
    4. Tsitsikov EN,
    5. Watts TH
    . ERK-dependent Bim modulation downstream of the 4-1BB-TRAF1 signaling axis is a critical mediator of CD8 T cell survival in vivo . J Immunol 2008;180:8093–101.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  27. 27.↵
    1. So T,
    2. Lee S-W,
    3. Croft M
    . Immune regulation and control of regulatory T cells by OX40 and 4-1BB. Cytokine Growth Factor Rev 2008;19:253–62.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Wilcox RA,
    2. Tamada K,
    3. Strome SE,
    4. Chen L
    . Signaling through NK cell-associated CD137 promotes both helper function for CD8+ cytolytic T cells and responsiveness to IL-2 but not cytolytic activity. J Immunol 2002;169:4230–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  29. 29.↵
    1. Kohrt HE,
    2. Houot R,
    3. Goldstein MJ,
    4. Weiskopf K,
    5. Alizadeh AA,
    6. Brody J,
    7. et al.
    CD137 stimulation enhances the antilymphoma activity of anti-CD20 antibodies. Blood 2011;117:2423–32.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    1. Kohrt HE,
    2. Houot R,
    3. Weiskopf K,
    4. Goldstein MJ,
    5. Scheeren F,
    6. Czerwinski D,
    7. et al.
    Stimulation of natural killer cells with a CD137-specific antibody enhances trastuzumab efficacy in xenotransplant models of breast cancer. J Clin Invest 2012;122:1066–75.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. 31.↵
    1. Melero I,
    2. Shuford WW,
    3. Newby SA,
    4. Aruffo A,
    5. Ledbetter JA,
    6. Hellström KE,
    7. et al.
    Monoclonal antibodies against the 4-1BB T-cell activation molecule eradicate established tumors. Nat Med 1997;3:682–5.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Shuford WW,
    2. Klussman K,
    3. Tritchler DD,
    4. Loo DT,
    5. Chalupny J,
    6. Siadak AW,
    7. et al.
    4-1BB costimulatory signals preferentially induce CD8+ T cell proliferation and lead to the amplification in vivo of cytotoxic T cell responses. J Exp Med 1997;186:47–55.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    1. Murillo O,
    2. Dubrot J,
    3. Palazón A,
    4. Arina A,
    5. Azpilikueta A,
    6. Alfaro C,
    7. et al.
    In vivo depletion of DC impairs the anti-tumor effect of agonistic anti-CD137 mAb. Eur J Immunol 2009;39:2424–36.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Zhang B,
    2. Maris CH,
    3. Foell J,
    4. Whitmire J,
    5. Niu L,
    6. Song J,
    7. et al.
    Immune suppression or enhancement by CD137 T cell costimulation during acute viral infection is time dependent. J Clin Invest 2007;117:3029–41.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. 35.↵
    1. Sun Y,
    2. Subudhi SK,
    3. Fu Y-X
    . Co-stimulation agonists as a new immunotherapy for autoimmune diseases. Trends Mol Med 2003;9:483–9.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. 36.↵
    1. Palazón A,
    2. Teijeira A,
    3. Martínez-Forero I,
    4. Hervás-Stubbs S,
    5. Roncal C,
    6. Peñuelas I,
    7. et al.
    Agonist anti-CD137 mAb act on tumor endothelial cells to enhance recruitment of activated T lymphocytes. Cancer Res 2011;71:801–11.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    1. Palazón A,
    2. Martínez-Forero I,
    3. Teijeira A,
    4. Morales-Kastresana A,
    5. Alfaro C,
    6. Sanmamed MF,
    7. et al.
    The HIF-1α hypoxia response in tumor-infiltrating T lymphocytes induces functional CD137 (4-1BB) for immunotherapy. Cancer Discov 2012;2:608–23.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  38. 38.↵
    1. Melero I,
    2. Bach N,
    3. Hellström KE,
    4. Aruffo A,
    5. Mittler RS,
    6. Chen L
    . Amplification of tumor immunity by gene transfer of the co-stimulatory 4-1BB ligand: synergy with the CD28 co-stimulatory pathway. Eur J Immunol 1998;28:1116–21.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  39. 39.↵
    1. Ye Z,
    2. Hellström I,
    3. Hayden-Ledbetter M,
    4. Dahlin A,
    5. Ledbetter JA,
    6. Hellström KE
    . Gene therapy for cancer using single-chain Fv fragments specific for 4-1BB. Nat Med 2002;8:343–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    1. McNamara JO,
    2. Kolonias D,
    3. Pastor F,
    4. Mittler RS,
    5. Chen L,
    6. Giangrande PH,
    7. et al.
    Multivalent 4-1BB binding aptamers costimulate CD8+ T cells and inhibit tumor growth in mice. J Clin Invest 2008;118:376–86.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. 41.↵
    1. Pastor F,
    2. Kolonias D,
    3. McNamara JO II.,
    4. Gilboa E
    . Targeting 4-1BB costimulation to disseminated tumor lesions with bi-specific oligonucleotide aptamers. Mol Ther 2011;19:1878–86.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  42. 42.↵
    1. Ju S-A,
    2. Cheon S-H,
    3. Park S-M,
    4. Tam NQ,
    5. Kim YM,
    6. An WG,
    7. et al.
    Eradication of established renal cell carcinoma by a combination of 5-fluorouracil and anti-4-1BB monoclonal antibody in mice. Int J Cancer 2008;122:2784–90.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. 43.↵
    1. Kim YH,
    2. Choi BK,
    3. Kim KH,
    4. Kang SW,
    5. Kwon BS
    . Combination therapy with cisplatin and anti-4-1BB: synergistic anticancer effects and amelioration of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity. Cancer Res 2008;68:7264–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  44. 44.↵
    1. Verbrugge I,
    2. Hagekyriakou J,
    3. Sharp LL,
    4. Galli M,
    5. West A,
    6. McLaughlin NM,
    7. et al.
    Radiotherapy increases the permissiveness of established mammary tumors to rejection by immunomodulatory antibodies. Cancer Res 2012;72:3163–74.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  45. 45.↵
    1. Melero I,
    2. Martinez-Forero I,
    3. Dubrot J,
    4. Suarez N,
    5. Palazón A,
    6. Chen L
    . Palettes of vaccines and immunostimulatory monoclonal antibodies for combination. Clin. Cancer Res 2009;15:1507–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  46. 46.↵
    1. John LB,
    2. Howland LJ,
    3. Flynn JK,
    4. West AC,
    5. Devaud C,
    6. Duong CP,
    7. et al.
    Oncolytic virus and anti-4-1BB combination therapy elicits strong antitumor immunity against established cancer. Cancer Res 2012;72:1651–60.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  47. 47.↵
    1. Quetglas JI,
    2. Dubrot J,
    3. Bezunartea J,
    4. Sanmamed MF,
    5. Hervas-Stubbs S,
    6. Smerdou C,
    7. et al.
    Immunotherapeutic synergy between anti-CD137 mAb and intratumoral administration of a cytopathic semliki forest virus encoding IL-12. Mol Ther 2012;20:1664–75.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  48. 48.↵
    1. Alizadeh AA,
    2. Gentles AJ,
    3. Alencar AJ,
    4. Liu CL,
    5. Kohrt HE,
    6. Houot R,
    7. et al.
    Prediction of survival in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma based on the expression of 2 genes reflecting tumor and microenvironment. Blood 2011;118:1350–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  49. 49.↵
    1. Niu L,
    2. Strahotin S,
    3. Hewes B,
    4. Zhang B,
    5. Zhang Y,
    6. Archer D,
    7. et al.
    Cytokine-mediated disruption of lymphocyte trafficking, hemopoiesis, and induction of lymphopenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia in anti-CD137-treated mice. J Immunol 2007;178:4194–213.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  50. 50.↵
    1. Dubrot J,
    2. Milheiro F,
    3. Alfaro C,
    4. Palazón A,
    5. Martinez-Forero I,
    6. Perez-Gracia JL,
    7. et al.
    Treatment with anti-CD137 mAbs causes intense accumulations of liver T cells without selective antitumor immunotherapeutic effects in this organ. Cancer Immunol Immunother 2010;59:1223–33.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  51. 51.↵
    1. Fisher TS,
    2. Kamperschroer C,
    3. Oliphant T,
    4. Love VA,
    5. Lira PD,
    6. Doyonnas R,
    7. et al.
    Targeting of 4-1BB by monoclonal antibody PF-05082566 enhances T-cell function and promotes anti-tumor activity. Cancer Immunol Immunother 2012;61:1721–33.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  52. 52.↵
    1. Paterson DJ,
    2. Jefferies WA,
    3. Green JR,
    4. Brandon MR,
    5. Corthesy P,
    6. Puklavec M,
    7. et al.
    Antigens of activated rat T lymphocytes including a molecule of 50,000 Mr detected only on CD4 positive T blasts. Mol Immunol 1987;24:1281–90.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  53. 53.↵
    1. Croft M
    . Control of immunity by the TNFR-related molecule OX40 (CD134). Annu Rev Immunol 2010;28:57–78.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  54. 54.↵
    1. Gramaglia I,
    2. Jember A,
    3. Pippig SD,
    4. Weinberg AD,
    5. Killeen N,
    6. Croft M
    . The OX40 costimulatory receptor determines the development of CD4 memory by regulating primary clonal expansion. J Immunol 2000;165:3043–50.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  55. 55.↵
    1. Arch RH,
    2. Thompson CB
    . 4-1BB and Ox40 are members of a tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-nerve growth factor receptor subfamily that bind TNF receptor-associated factors and activate nuclear factor kappaB. Mol Cell Biol 1998;18:558–65.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  56. 56.↵
    1. Kawamata S,
    2. Hori T,
    3. Imura A,
    4. Takaori-Kondo A,
    5. Uchiyama T
    . Activation of OX40 signal transduction pathways leads to tumor necrosis factor receptor-associated factor (TRAF) 2- and TRAF5-mediated NF-kappaB activation. J Biol Chem 1998;273:5808–14.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  57. 57.↵
    1. Song J,
    2. So T,
    3. Croft M
    . Activation of NF-kappaB1 by OX40 contributes to antigen-driven T cell expansion and survival. J Immunol 2008;180:7240–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  58. 58.↵
    1. Leach DR,
    2. Krummel MF,
    3. Allison JP
    . Enhancement of antitumor immunity by CTLA-4 blockade. Science 1996;271:1734–6.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  59. 59.↵
    1. Weinberg AD,
    2. Rivera MM,
    3. Prell R,
    4. Morris A,
    5. Ramstad T,
    6. Vetto JT,
    7. et al.
    Engagement of the OX-40 receptor in vivo enhances antitumor immunity. J Immunol 2000;164:2160–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  60. 60.↵
    1. Kjaergaard J,
    2. Tanaka J,
    3. Kim JA,
    4. Rothchild K,
    5. Weinberg A,
    6. Shu S
    . Therapeutic efficacy of OX-40 receptor antibody depends on tumor immunogenicity and anatomic site of tumor growth. Cancer Res 2000;60:5514–21.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  61. 61.↵
    1. Ndhlovu LC,
    2. Ishii N,
    3. Murata K,
    4. Sato T,
    5. Sugamura K
    . Critical involvement of OX40 ligand signals in the T cell priming events during experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. J Immunol 2001;167:2991–9.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  62. 62.↵
    1. Piconese S,
    2. Valzasina B,
    3. Colombo MP
    . OX40 triggering blocks suppression by regulatory T cells and facilitates tumor rejection. J Exp Med 2008;205:825–39.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  63. 63.↵
    1. Ruby CE,
    2. Montler R,
    3. Zheng R,
    4. Shu S,
    5. Weinberg AD
    . IL-12 is required for anti-OX40-mediated CD4 T cell survival. J Immunol 2008;180:2140–8.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  64. 64.↵
    1. Redmond WL,
    2. Triplett T,
    3. Floyd K,
    4. Weinberg AD
    . Dual anti-OX40/IL-2 therapy augments tumor immunotherapy via IL-2R-mediated regulation of OX40 expression. PLoS ONE 2012;7:e34467.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  65. 65.↵
    1. Murata S,
    2. Ladle BH,
    3. Kim PS,
    4. Lutz ER,
    5. Wolpoe ME,
    6. Ivie SE,
    7. et al.
    OX40 costimulation synergizes with GM-CSF whole-cell vaccination to overcome established CD8+ T cell tolerance to an endogenous tumor antigen. J Immunol 2006;176:974–83.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  66. 66.↵
    1. Lee S-J,
    2. Myers L,
    3. Muralimohan G,
    4. Dai J,
    5. Qiao Y,
    6. Li Z,
    7. et al.
    4-1BB and OX40 dual costimulation synergistically stimulate primary specific CD8 T cells for robust effector function. J Immunol 2004;173:3002–12.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  67. 67.↵
    1. Houot R,
    2. Levy R
    . T-cell modulation combined with intratumoral CpG cures lymphoma in a mouse model without the need for chemotherapy. Blood 2009;113:3546–52.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  68. 68.↵
    1. Hirschhorn-Cymerman D,
    2. Rizzuto GA,
    3. Merghoub T,
    4. Cohen AD,
    5. Avogadri F,
    6. Lesokhin AM,
    7. et al.
    OX40 engagement and chemotherapy combination provides potent antitumor immunity with concomitant regulatory T cell apoptosis. J Exp Med 2009;206:1103–16.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  69. 69.↵
    1. Gough MJ,
    2. Crittenden MR,
    3. Sarff M,
    4. Pang P,
    5. Seung SK,
    6. Vetto JT,
    7. et al.
    Adjuvant therapy with agonistic antibodies to CD134 (OX40) increases local control after surgical or radiation therapy of cancer in mice. J Immunother 2010;33:798–809.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  70. 70.↵
    1. Kitamura N,
    2. Murata S,
    3. Ueki T,
    4. Mekata E,
    5. Reilly RT,
    6. Jaffee EM,
    7. et al.
    OX40 costimulation can abrogate Foxp3 +regulatory T cell-mediated suppression of antitumor immunity. Int J Cancer 2009;125:630–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  71. 71.↵
    1. Burocchi A,
    2. Pittoni P,
    3. Gorzanelli A,
    4. Colombo MP,
    5. Piconese S
    . Intratumor OX40 stimulation inhibits IRF1 expression and IL-10 production by Treg cells while enhancing CD40L expression by effector memory T cells. Eur J Immunol 2011;41:3615–26.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  72. 72.↵
    1. Qui HZ,
    2. Hagymasi AT,
    3. Bandyopadhyay S,
    4. St Rose M-C,
    5. Ramanarasimhaiah R,
    6. Ménoret A,
    7. et al.
    CD134 plus CD137 dual costimulation induces Eomesodermin in CD4 T cells to program cytotoxic Th1 differentiation. J Immunol 2011;187:3555–64.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  73. 73.↵
    1. Hirschhorn-Cymerman D,
    2. Budhu S,
    3. Kitano S,
    4. Liu C,
    5. Zhao F,
    6. Zhong H,
    7. et al.
    Induction of tumoricidal function in CD4+ T cells is associated with concomitant memory and terminally differentiated phenotype. J Exp Med 2012;209:2113–26.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  74. 74.↵
    1. Weinberg AD,
    2. Thalhofer C,
    3. Morris N,
    4. Walker JM,
    5. Seiss D,
    6. Wong S,
    7. et al.
    Anti-OX40 (CD134) administration to nonhuman primates: immunostimulatory effects and toxicokinetic study. J Immunother 2006;29:575–85.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  75. 75.↵
    1. Jensen SM,
    2. Maston LD,
    3. Gough MJ,
    4. Ruby CE,
    5. Redmond WL,
    6. Crittenden M,
    7. et al.
    Signaling through OX40 enhances antitumor immunity. Semin Oncol 2010;37:524–32.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  76. 76.↵
    1. Nocentini G,
    2. Giunchi L,
    3. Ronchetti S,
    4. Krausz LT,
    5. Bartoli A,
    6. Moraca R,
    7. et al.
    A new member of the tumor necrosis factor/nerve growth factor receptor family inhibits T cell receptor-induced apoptosis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997;94:6216–21.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  77. 77.↵
    1. Gurney AL,
    2. Marsters SA,
    3. Huang RM,
    4. Pitti RM,
    5. Mark DT,
    6. Baldwin DT,
    7. et al.
    Identification of a new member of the tumor necrosis factor family and its receptor, a human ortholog of mouse GITR. Curr Biol 1999;9:215–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  78. 78.↵
    1. Kwon B,
    2. Yu KY,
    3. Ni J,
    4. Yu GL,
    5. Jang IK,
    6. Kim YJ,
    7. et al.
    Identification of a novel activation-inducible protein of the tumor necrosis factor receptor superfamily and its ligand. J Biol Chem 1999;274:6056–61.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  79. 79.↵
    1. Ronchetti S,
    2. Zollo O,
    3. Bruscoli S,
    4. Agostini M,
    5. Bianchini R,
    6. Nocentini G,
    7. et al.
    GITR, a member of the TNF receptor superfamily, is costimulatory to mouse T lymphocyte subpopulations. Eur J Immunol 2004;34:613–22.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  80. 80.↵
    1. Schaer DA,
    2. Murphy JT,
    3. Wolchok JD
    . Modulation of GITR for cancer immunotherapy. Curr Opin Immunol 2012;24:217–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  81. 81.↵
    1. McHugh RS,
    2. Whitters MJ,
    3. Piccirillo CA,
    4. Young DA,
    5. Shevach EM,
    6. Collins M,
    7. et al.
    CD4(+)CD25(+) immunoregulatory T cells: gene expression analysis reveals a functional role for the glucocorticoid-induced TNF receptor. Immunity 2002;16:311–23.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  82. 82.↵
    1. Shimizu J,
    2. Yamazaki S,
    3. Takahashi T,
    4. Ishida Y,
    5. Sakaguchi S
    . Stimulation of CD25(+)CD4(+) regulatory T cells through GITR breaks immunological self-tolerance. Nat Immunol 2002;3:135–42.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  83. 83.↵
    1. Valzasina B,
    2. Guiducci C,
    3. Dislich H,
    4. Killeen N,
    5. Weinberg AD,
    6. Colombo MP
    . Triggering of OX40 (CD134) on CD4(+)CD25+ T cells blocks their inhibitory activity: a novel regulatory role for OX40 and its comparison with GITR. Blood 2005;105:2845–51.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  84. 84.↵
    1. Stephens GL,
    2. McHugh RS,
    3. Whitters MJ,
    4. Young DA,
    5. Luxenberg D,
    6. Carreno BM,
    7. et al.
    Engagement of glucocorticoid-induced TNFR family-related receptor on effector T cells by its ligand mediates resistance to suppression by CD4+CD25+ T cells. J Immunol 2004;173:5008–20.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  85. 85.↵
    1. Ramirez-Montagut T,
    2. Chow A,
    3. Hirschhorn-Cymerman D,
    4. Terwey TH,
    5. Kochman AA,
    6. Lu S,
    7. et al.
    Glucocorticoid-induced TNF receptor family related gene activation overcomes tolerance/ignorance to melanoma differentiation antigens and enhances antitumor immunity. J Immunol 2006;176:6434–42.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  86. 86.↵
    1. Cohen AD,
    2. Schaer DA,
    3. Liu C,
    4. Li Y,
    5. Hirschhorn-Cymmerman D,
    6. Kim SC,
    7. et al.
    Agonist anti-GITR monoclonal antibody induces melanoma tumor immunity in mice by altering regulatory T cell stability and intra-tumor accumulation. PLoS ONE 2010;5:e10436.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  87. 87.↵
    1. Ko K,
    2. Yamazaki S,
    3. Nakamura K,
    4. Nishioka T,
    5. Hirota K,
    6. Yamaguchi T,
    7. et al.
    Treatment of advanced tumors with agonistic anti-GITR mAb and its effects on tumor-infiltrating Foxp3+CD25+CD4 +regulatory T cells. J Exp Med 2005;202:885–91.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  88. 88.↵
    1. Tapmeier TT,
    2. Fearn A,
    3. Brown K,
    4. Chowdhury P,
    5. Sacks SH,
    6. Sheerin NS,
    7. et al.
    Pivotal role of CD4+ T cells in renal fibrosis following ureteric obstruction. Kidney Int 2010;78:351–62.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  89. 89.↵
    1. Turk MJ,
    2. Guevara-Patiño JA,
    3. Rizzuto GA,
    4. Engelhorn ME,
    5. Sakaguchi S,
    6. Houghton AN
    . Concomitant tumor immunity to a poorly immunogenic melanoma is prevented by regulatory T cells. J Exp Med 2004;200:771–82.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  90. 90.↵
    1. Cohen AD,
    2. Diab A,
    3. Perales M-A,
    4. Wolchok JD,
    5. Rizzuto G,
    6. Merghoub T,
    7. et al.
    Agonist anti-GITR antibody enhances vaccine-induced CD8(+) T-cell responses and tumor immunity. Cancer Res 2006;66:4904–12.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  91. 91.↵
    1. Boczkowski D,
    2. Lee J,
    3. Pruitt S,
    4. Nair S
    . Dendritic cells engineered to secrete anti-GITR antibodies are effective adjuvants to dendritic cell-based immunotherapy. Cancer Gene Ther 2009;16:900–11.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  92. 92.↵
    1. Hoffmann C,
    2. Stanke J,
    3. Kaufmann AM,
    4. Loddenkemper C,
    5. Schneider A,
    6. Cichon G
    . Combining T-cell vaccination and application of agonistic anti-GITR mAb (DTA-1) induces complete eradication of HPV oncogene expressing tumors in mice. J Immunother 2010;33:136–45.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  93. 93.↵
    1. Melero I,
    2. Grimaldi AM,
    3. Perez-Gracia JL,
    4. Ascierto PA
    . Clinical development of immunostimulatory monoclonal antibodies and opportunities for combination. Clin Cancer Res 2013;19:997–1008.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  94. 94.↵
    1. Hodi FS,
    2. O'Day SJ,
    3. McDermott DF,
    4. Weber RW,
    5. Sosman JA,
    6. Haanen JB,
    7. et al.
    Improved survival with ipilimumab in patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 2010;363:711–23.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  95. 95.↵
    1. Robert C,
    2. Thomas L,
    3. Bondarenko I,
    4. O'Day S,
    5. Weber J,
    6. Garbe C,
    7. et al.
    Ipilimumab plus dacarbazine for previously untreated metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 2011;364:2517–26.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  96. 96.↵
    1. Brahmer JR,
    2. Tykodi SS,
    3. Chow LQM,
    4. Hwu W-J,
    5. Topalian SL,
    6. Hwu P,
    7. et al.
    Safety and activity of anti-PD-L1 antibody in patients with advanced cancer. N Engl J Med 2012;366:2455–65.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  97. 97.↵
    1. Topalian SL,
    2. Hodi FS,
    3. Brahmer JR,
    4. Gettinger SN,
    5. Smith DC,
    6. McDermott DF,
    7. et al.
    Safety, activity, and immune correlates of anti-PD-1 antibody in cancer. N Engl J Med 2012;366:2443–54.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  98. 98.↵
    1. Sznol M,
    2. Chen L
    . Antagonist antibodies to PD-1 and B7-H1 (PD-L1) in the treatment of advanced human cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2013;19:1021–34.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  99. 99.↵
    1. Muriglan SJ,
    2. Ramirez-Montagut T,
    3. Alpdogan O,
    4. Van Huystee TW,
    5. Eng JM,
    6. Hubbard VM,
    7. et al.
    GITR activation induces an opposite effect on alloreactive CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells in graft-versus-host disease. J Exp Med 2004;200:149–57.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  100. 100.↵
    1. Vonderheide RH,
    2. Glennie MJ
    . Agonistic CD40 antibodies and cancer therapy. Clin Cancer Res 2013;19:1035–43.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Clinical Cancer Research: 19 (5)
March 2013
Volume 19, Issue 5
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover

Sign up for alerts

View this article with LENS

Open full page PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for sharing this Clinical Cancer Research article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Agonist Antibodies to TNFR Molecules That Costimulate T and NK Cells
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Clinical Cancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Clinical Cancer Research.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Agonist Antibodies to TNFR Molecules That Costimulate T and NK Cells
Ignacio Melero, Daniel Hirschhorn-Cymerman, Aizea Morales-Kastresana, Miguel F. Sanmamed and Jedd D. Wolchok
Clin Cancer Res March 1 2013 (19) (5) 1044-1053; DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-2065

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Agonist Antibodies to TNFR Molecules That Costimulate T and NK Cells
Ignacio Melero, Daniel Hirschhorn-Cymerman, Aizea Morales-Kastresana, Miguel F. Sanmamed and Jedd D. Wolchok
Clin Cancer Res March 1 2013 (19) (5) 1044-1053; DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-2065
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Future Perspective
    • Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of interest
    • Authors' Contributions
    • Grant Support
    • Acknowledgments
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Advertisement

Related Articles

Cited By...

More in this TOC Section

  • Refining Immunotherapy Approvals
  • Development Challenges: Valuable Immuno-oncology Biomarkers
  • Immunotherapy Trial Design Considerations
Show more CCR Focus
  • Home
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Privacy Policy
Facebook  Twitter  LinkedIn  YouTube  RSS

Articles

  • Online First
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • CCR Focus Archive
  • Meeting Abstracts

Info for

  • Authors
  • Subscribers
  • Advertisers
  • Librarians

About Clinical Cancer Research

  • About the Journal
  • Editorial Board
  • Permissions
  • Submit a Manuscript
AACR logo

Copyright © 2021 by the American Association for Cancer Research.

Clinical Cancer Research
eISSN: 1557-3265
ISSN: 1078-0432

Advertisement