Niittykoski Minna, von Und Zu Fraunberg Mikael, Martikainen Miika, Rauramaa Tuomas, Immonen Arto, Koponen Susanna, Leinonen Ville, Vähä-Koskela Markus, Zhang Qiwei, Kühnel Florian, Mei Ya-Fang, Ylä-Herttuala Seppo, Jääskeläinen Juha E, Hinkkanen Ari
Biotechnology and Molecular Medicine, A. I. Virtanen Institute for Molecular Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
NeuroCenter of Kuopio University Hospital, Kuopio, Finland; Neurosurgery, Institute of Clinical Medicine, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland.
Transl Oncol. 2017 Oct;10(5):772-779. doi: 10.1016/j.tranon.2017.07.002. Epub 2017 Aug 4.
Oncolytic adenoviruses show promise in targeting gliomas because they do not replicate in normal brain cells. However, clinical responses occur only in a subset of patients. One explanation could be the heterogenic expression level of virus receptors. Another contributing factor could be variable activity of tumor antiviral defenses in different glioma subtypes.
We established a collection of primary low-passage cell lines from different glioma subtypes (3 glioblastomas, 3 oligoastrocytomas, and 2 oligodendrogliomas) and assessed them for receptor expression and sensitivity to human adenovirus (HAd) serotypes 3, 5, and 11p. To gauge the impact of antiviral defenses, we also compared the infectivity of the oncolytic adenoviruses in interferon (IFN)-pretreated cells with IFN-sensitive Semliki Forest virus (SFV).
Immunostaining revealed generally low expression of HAd5 receptor CAR in both primary tumors and derived cell lines. HAd11p receptor CD46 levels were maintained at moderate levels in both primary tumor samples and derived cell lines. HAd3 receptor DSG-2 was reduced in the cell lines compared to the tumors. Yet, at equal multiplicities of infection, the oncolytic potency of HAd5 in vitro in tumor-derived cells was comparable to HAd11p, whereas HAd3 lysed fewer cells than either of the other two HAd serotypes in 72 hours. IFN blocked replication of SFV, while HAds were rather unaffected.
Adenovirus receptor levels on glioma-derived cell lines did not correlate with infection efficacy and may not be a relevant indicator of clinical oncolytic potency. Adenovirus receptor analysis should be preferentially performed on biopsies obtained perioperatively.
溶瘤腺病毒在靶向胶质瘤方面显示出前景,因为它们不在正常脑细胞中复制。然而,临床反应仅发生在一部分患者中。一种解释可能是病毒受体的异质性表达水平。另一个促成因素可能是不同胶质瘤亚型中肿瘤抗病毒防御的活性不同。
我们建立了来自不同胶质瘤亚型(3例胶质母细胞瘤、3例少突星形细胞瘤和2例少突胶质细胞瘤)的原代低传代细胞系,并评估它们的受体表达以及对3型、5型和11p型人腺病毒(HAd)的敏感性。为了评估抗病毒防御的影响,我们还比较了溶瘤腺病毒在经干扰素(IFN)预处理的细胞与对IFN敏感的Semliki森林病毒(SFV)中的感染性。
免疫染色显示,原代肿瘤及其衍生的细胞系中HAd5受体柯萨奇病毒和腺病毒受体(CAR)的表达普遍较低。HAd11p受体CD46水平在原代肿瘤样本及其衍生的细胞系中均维持在中等水平。与肿瘤相比,细胞系中HAd3受体桥粒芯糖蛋白2(DSG-2)减少。然而,在相同感染复数下,HAd5在体外对肿瘤衍生细胞的溶瘤效力与HAd11p相当,而在72小时内,HAd3裂解的细胞比其他两种HAd血清型中的任何一种都少。IFN阻断了SFV的复制,而HAd则基本不受影响。
胶质瘤衍生细胞系上的腺病毒受体水平与感染效力不相关,可能不是临床溶瘤效力的相关指标。腺病毒受体分析应优先在围手术期获取的活检组织上进行。