Den Otter Willem, Jacobs John J L, Battermann Jan J, Hordijk Gerrit Jan, Krastev Zachary, Moiseeva Ekaterina V, Stewart Rachel J E, Ziekman Paul G P M, Koten Jan Willem
Department of Pathobiology, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Utrecht University, Yalelaan 1, 3584 CL Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Cancer Immunol Immunother. 2008 Jul;57(7):931-50. doi: 10.1007/s00262-008-0455-z.
This is a position paper about the therapeutic effects of locally applied free IL-2 in the treatment of cancer. Local therapy: IL-2 therapy of cancer was originally introduced as a systemic therapy. This therapy led to about 20% objective responses. Systemic therapy however was very toxic due to the vascular leakage syndrome. Nevertheless, this treatment was a break-through in cancer immunotherapy and stimulated some interesting questions: Supposing that the mechanism of IL-2 treatment is both proliferation and tumoricidal activity of the tumor infiltrating cells, then locally applied IL-2 should result in a much higher local IL-2 concentration than systemic IL-2 application. Consequently a greater beneficial effect could be expected after local IL-2 application (peritumoral = juxtatumoral, intratumoral, intra-arterial, intracavitary, or intratracheal = inhalation). Free IL-2: Many groups have tried to prepare a more effective IL-2 formulation than free IL-2. Examples are slow release systems, insertion of the IL-2 gene into a tumor cell causing prolonged IL-2 release. However, logistically free IL-2 is much easier to apply; hence we concentrated in this review and in most of our experiments on the use of free IL-2. Local therapy with free IL-2 may be effective against transplanted tumors in experimental animals, and against various spontaneous carcinomas, sarcomas, and melanoma in veterinary and human cancer patients. It may induce rejection of very large, metastasized tumor loads, for instance advanced clinical tumors. The effects of even a single IL-2 application may be impressive. Not each tumor or tumor type is sensitive to local IL-2 application. For instance transplanted EL4 lymphoma or TLX9 lymphoma were not sensitive in our hands. Also the extent of sensitivity differs: In Bovine Ocular Squamous Cell Carcinoma (BOSCC) often a complete regression is obtained, whereas with the Bovine Vulval Papilloma and Carcinoma Complex (BVPCC) mainly stable disease is attained. Analysis of the results of local IL-2 therapy in 288 cases of cancer in human patients shows that there were 27% Complete Regressions (CR), 23% Partial Regressions (PR), 18% Stable Disease (SD), and 32% Progressive Disease (PD). In all tumors analyzed, local IL-2 therapy was more effective than systemic IL-2 treatment. Intratumoral IL-2 applications are more effective than peritumoral application or application at a distant site. Tumor regression induced by intratumoral IL-2 application may be a fast process (requiring about a week) in the case of a highly vascular tumor since IL-2 induces vascular leakage/edema and consequently massive tumor necrosis. The latter then stimulates an immune response. In less vascular tumors or less vascular tumor sites, regression may require 9-20 months; this regression is mainly caused by a cytotoxic leukocyte reaction. Hence the disadvantageous vascular leakage syndrome complicating systemic treatment is however advantageous in local treatment, since local edema may initiate tumor necrosis. Thus the therapeutic effect of local IL-2 treatment is not primarily based on tumor immunity, but tumor immunity seems to be useful as a secondary component of the IL-2 induced local processes. If local IL-2 is combined with surgery, radiotherapy or local chemotherapy the therapeutic effect is usually greater than with either therapy alone. Hence local free IL-2 application can be recommended as an addition to standard treatment protocols. Local treatment with free IL-2 is straightforward and can readily be applied even during surgical interventions. Local IL-2 treatment is usually without serious side effects and besides minor complaints it is generally well supported. Only small quantities of IL-2 are required. Hence the therapy is relatively cheap. A single IL-2 application of 4.5 million U IL-2 costs about 70 Euros. Thus combined local treatment may offer an alternative in those circumstances when more expensive forms of treatment are not available, for instance in resource poor countries.
这是一篇关于局部应用游离白细胞介素-2(IL-2)治疗癌症的疗效的立场文件。局部治疗:癌症的IL-2治疗最初作为一种全身治疗方法引入。这种治疗方法导致约20%的客观缓解率。然而,由于血管渗漏综合征,全身治疗毒性很大。尽管如此,这种治疗方法是癌症免疫治疗的一个突破,并引发了一些有趣的问题:假设IL-2治疗的机制是肿瘤浸润细胞的增殖和杀肿瘤活性,那么局部应用IL-2应导致局部IL-2浓度远高于全身应用IL-2。因此,局部应用IL-2后有望产生更大的有益效果(瘤周=肿瘤旁、瘤内、动脉内、腔内或气管内=吸入)。游离IL-2:许多研究小组试图制备比游离IL-2更有效的IL-2制剂。例如缓释系统,将IL-2基因插入肿瘤细胞以实现IL-2的持续释放。然而,从实际操作角度来看,游离IL-2更容易应用;因此,在本综述以及我们的大多数实验中,我们专注于游离IL-2的使用。局部应用游离IL-2可能对实验动物中的移植肿瘤有效,并且对兽医和人类癌症患者中的各种自发性癌、肉瘤和黑色素瘤有效。它可能诱导非常大的转移性肿瘤负荷的消退,例如晚期临床肿瘤。即使单次应用IL-2的效果也可能令人印象深刻。并非每种肿瘤或肿瘤类型都对局部应用IL-2敏感。例如,在我们的实验中,移植的EL4淋巴瘤或TLX9淋巴瘤不敏感。而且敏感程度也有所不同:在牛眼鳞状细胞癌(BOSCC)中,通常可实现完全消退,而对于牛外阴乳头瘤和癌复合体(BVPCC),主要是病情稳定。对288例人类癌症患者局部应用IL-2治疗结果的分析表明,完全缓解(CR)率为27%,部分缓解(PR)率为23%,病情稳定(SD)率为18%,病情进展(PD)率为32%。在所有分析的肿瘤中,局部应用IL-2治疗比全身应用IL-2治疗更有效。瘤内应用IL-2比瘤周应用或远处应用更有效。对于血管丰富的肿瘤,瘤内应用IL-2诱导的肿瘤消退可能是一个快速过程(大约需要一周),因为IL-2诱导血管渗漏/水肿,进而导致大量肿瘤坏死。后者随后刺激免疫反应。在血管较少的肿瘤或血管较少的肿瘤部位,消退可能需要9 - 20个月;这种消退主要由细胞毒性白细胞反应引起。因此,全身治疗中出现的不利的血管渗漏综合征在局部治疗中却是有利因素,因为局部水肿可能引发肿瘤坏死。因此,局部应用IL-2治疗的疗效并非主要基于肿瘤免疫,但肿瘤免疫似乎是IL-2诱导的局部过程的一个次要组成部分。如果局部应用IL-2与手术、放疗或局部化疗联合使用,治疗效果通常比单独使用任何一种治疗方法都要好。因此,局部应用游离IL-2可推荐作为标准治疗方案的补充。局部应用游离IL-2操作简单,即使在手术过程中也很容易应用。局部应用IL-2治疗通常没有严重的副作用,除了轻微不适外,总体耐受性良好。只需要少量的IL-2。因此,该治疗相对便宜。单次应用450万单位的IL-2花费约70欧元。因此,在无法获得更昂贵治疗形式的情况下,例如在资源匮乏的国家,联合局部治疗可能提供一种替代方案。