Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Feb 14;121(7):1165-74.
doi: 10.1182/blood-2012-06-438002. Epub 2012 Dec 14.

Anti-CD22-chimeric antigen receptors targeting B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia

Affiliations

Anti-CD22-chimeric antigen receptors targeting B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukemia

Waleed Haso et al. Blood. .

Abstract

Immune targeting of B-cell malignancies using chimeric antigen receptors (CARs) is a promising new approach, but critical factors impacting CAR efficacy remain unclear. To test the suitability of targeting CD22 on precursor B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (BCP-ALL), lymphoblasts from 111 patients with BCP-ALL were assayed for CD22 expression and all were found to be CD22-positive, with median CD22 expression levels of 3500 sites/cell. Three distinct binding domains targeting CD22 were fused to various TCR signaling domains ± an IgG heavy chain constant domain (CH2CH3) to create a series of vector constructs suitable to delineate optimal CAR configuration. CARs derived from the m971 anti-CD22 mAb, which targets a proximal CD22 epitope demonstrated superior antileukemic activity compared with those incorporating other binding domains, and addition of a 4-1BB signaling domain to CD28.CD3 constructs diminished potency, whereas increasing affinity of the anti-CD22 binding motif, and extending the CD22 binding domain away from the membrane via CH2CH3 had no effect. We conclude that second-generation m971 mAb-derived anti-CD22 CARs are promising novel therapeutics that should be tested in BCP-ALL.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Expression of CD22 and CD19 B-cell precursor ALL cell lines. (A) Surface expression of CD19 and CD22 on the ALL lines REH, SEM, NALM6-GL, KOPN8, Daudi, Raji, and on K562, as determined by directly labeled flow cytometry antibodies. (B) Quantified surface antigen expression, y-axis, for each line as listed on the x-axis. (C) CD22 site density on 110 individual patient samples of BCP-ALL, with median indicated.
Figure 2
Figure 2
CD22 CARs expressing high affinity scFv (HA22), standard affinity (BL22), and membrane proximal binding (m971) anti-CD22 scFv-derived domains. (A) Second-generation CAR constructs (CD28 and CD3zeta or 4-1BB and CD3zeta signaling domains) and third-generation constructs (CD28, 4-1BB, and CD3zeta) expressed HA22, BL22, m971, or FMC63-derived scFv, ± an IgG1-derived CH2CH3 spacer domain. (B) HA22 and BL22 scFvs bind Ig domain 3, whereas m971 binds within Ig domains 5-7 of CD22. (C) Expression on transduced T cells of CD22 CARs containing CH2CH3 domains (top row) or in the shorter format, omitting this domain (bottom row). CD22 CARs were detected by CD3-APC (y-axis) and CD22-Fc followed by an anti–IgG-Fc-FITC stain. Percent transduction is noted in the top-right quadrant of each plot. (D) MFI, y-axis, of the indicated CD22 CAR constructs, x-axis. Results are representative of more than 3 retroviral supernatant preparations.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Comparison of CD22-CAR and CD19-CAR–mediated lysis. (A) 51Cr-release assay to evaluate lytic activity of CD22 HA22SH-28z second-generation CAR (inverted triangle), m971-28z second-generation CAR (gray triangle), CD19 CAR (squares), or mock transduced T cells (circles) against ALL lines, as listed. The E/T ratio is shown on the x-axis. (B) Top row, flow cytometric analysis of CD22 expression on 7 primary patient pre-B ALL samples (see “Methods”). Percentage expression over control is indicated. Bottom row, lysis of patient blasts with m971-28z or HASH-28z–expressing T cells in a 4 hours 51Cr-release assay, percent lysis indicated at E/T ratio of 30:1. Significant differences between the vectors is noted (average of triplicate wells). For m971 versus mock, P5 and P7 had P > .05, for HASH P2, P5, and P7 has P > .05, all other values versus mock were less than 0.05.
Figure 4
Figure 4
HA22 and BL22-derived CD22 CARs mediate similar lytic activity. (A) The lytic activity HA22 and BL22-derived CD22 CARs in the context of second and third-generation signaling constructs was compared against ALL cell lines at the indicated E:T ratios in a 4-hour 51Cr-release assay. SEM of triplicate wells is shown. The first row compares binding affinity of the scFv (BL22 versus HA22-derived) in second-generation vectors, the second row makes the comparison in the third-generation vectors, and the third row compares vectors with and without CH2CH3 domains (HA22-28z versus HASH22-28z). (B) Comparison of signaling domain structure on vector formats using REH, SEM, NALM-6, and KOPN-8 cell line targets. Lytic activity is expressed in lytic units, which corrects for transduction efficiency, at an E/T ratio of 10:1. Significant differences are noted, using an unpaired student t test. (C) Increasing concentrations of CD22-Fc, as designated on the x-axis, were added to triplicate wells in a 4-hour lytic assay using REH as the target and an E:T of 10:1. CD19-CAR, dashed line, served as a negative control. Assays were repeated 3 times with similar results.
Figure 5
Figure 5
Cytokine release by CAR-transduced T cells. CAR-transduced T cells (vectors listed, x-axis) were incubated with irradiated CD22-high (Raji, column 1), CD22-low (NALM6-GL, column 2), or CD22-negative (K562, column 3) leukemia cell lines at a ratio of 10:1 for 24 hours and culture supernatants analyzed for IFN-γ (top row), IL-2 (second row), and TNF-α (third row). Averages and SD of triplicate wells are shown.
Figure 6
Figure 6
Evaluation of CD22 CARs in vivo. On day 0, NSG mice were injected intravenously with 5 × 105 NALM6-GL cells. On day 3 mice received 1 × 107 CAR+ T cells (HA22SH-28z (n = 5) or m971-28z (n = 5) or mock T cells (n = 5). (A) Bioluminescent imaging pre-treatment (day 3), day 7 and day 15 after intravenous injection of NALM6-GL. (B) Bioluminescent signal for each mouse over time, comparing mock, HASH-28z and m971-28z. (C) Kaplan-Meier survival curves for each group, listing significant differences between each group, survival statistics calculated using log-rank (Mantel-Cox) analysis. (D) Top row: flow cytometric analysis of transduced T cells used in the experiment, as well as CD22 and CD19 expression on NALM6-GL before injection. Bottom row: left panel, FSC versus SSC gating of splenocytes excised from a mouse on sacrifice; center-left panel, FSC versus SSC gated cells were analyzed for green fluorescence (NALM6-GL, x-axis) and CD45-PerCp (y-axis); center right, CD45-gated cells were stained for CD3-APC (y-axis) and for CAR expression; right panel, GFP+ gated cells were stained for CD22 and CD19. (E) In a separate experiment, carried out identically, mice were killed on day 12, and analyzed for CAR expression on gated human T cells in the bone marrow, spleen, and blood. Percentage of T cells expressing CARs is plotted (y-axis), and significant differences, using unpaired 2-tailed t test, are shown.

Comment in

  • CAReful epitope selection matters.
    Handgretinger R. Handgretinger R. Blood. 2013 Feb 14;121(7):1065-6. doi: 10.1182/blood-2012-12-474239. Blood. 2013. PMID: 23411729 No abstract available.

References

    1. Pui CH, Evans WE. Treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med. 2006;354(2):166–178. - PubMed
    1. Bassan R, Hoelzer D. Modern therapy of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(5):532–543. - PubMed
    1. Wayne AS, Reaman GH, Helman LJ. Progress in the curative treatment of childhood hematologic malignancies. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(18):1271–1273. - PubMed
    1. Kantarjian H, Thomas D, Wayne AS, O'Brien S. Monoclonal Antibody-Based Therapies: A New Dawn in the Treatment of Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(31):3876–3883. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lee DW, Barrett DM, Mackall C, Orentas R, Grupp SA. The future is now: chimeric antigen receptors as new targeted therapies for childhood cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2012;18(10):2780–2790. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms