The anti-CD20 mAb rituximab is central to the treatment of B-cell malignancies, but resistance remains a significant problem. We recently reported that resistance could be explained, in part, by internalization of rituximab (type I anti-CD20) from the surface of certain B-cell malignancies, thus limiting engagement of natural effectors and increasing mAb consumption. Internalization of rituximab was most evident in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), but the extent of internalization was heteroge- IntroductionThe anti-CD20 mAb rituximab has improved the overall survival of patients with follicular (FL) and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). [1][2][3][4] However, in MCL, only modest responses are seen 5 and in CLL, fludarabine, cyclophosphamide and rituximab (FCR) therapy delivers improved responses but has yet to show a similar improvement in overall survival, 6 albeit the current follow-up is relatively short. Interestingly, those responses seen in CLL have often been achieved with high doses of rituximab, 6 suggesting that more mAb is needed to coat the targets or that it is consumed in some way. Even within rituximab-responsive lymphomas, a proportion of cases show resistance on first treatment with rituximab or eventually become resistant to rituximab-containing combination therapy (reviewed in Stolz et al 7 ). The molecular basis of this resistance and the observed sensitivity of different lymphoma subtypes is unclear (reviewed in Lim et al 8 ), but is highly relevant to improving outcomes.In addition to understanding target resistance, many groups are working to deliver anti-CD20 mAb reagents with improved affinity and more potent engagement of cytotoxic effectors. Anti-CD20 mAb can be defined as type I (eg, rituximab, ofatumumab) or type II (eg tositumumab, GA101), according to their ability to redistribute CD20 into lipid rafts in the plasma membrane and function in various effector assays. 9-11 It is still not clear what characteristics are required for the optimal reagent, but it is generally accepted that Fc:Fc ␥ receptor (Fc␥R) interactions are crucial to the efficacy of anti-CD20 mAb. [12][13][14][15] In particular, Fc␥RIIIa on myeloid effectors appears critical in controlling Ab potency and in keeping with this, lymphoma patients bearing the higher affinity 158V allele in Fc␥RIIIa respond better to rituximab compared with those with the low affinity 158F allotype, 16 leading many investigators to focus on augmenting the interaction of mAb with Fc␥RIIIa, for example via defucosylation. 17 Less attention has been given to the potential effects of the ITIM-containing inhibitory Fc␥R, Fc␥RIIb. Fc␥RIIb is a negative regulator of ITAM-containing receptors, such as the B-cell receptor (BCR) and the activatory Fc␥R. 18 Most hematopoietic cells coexpress inhibitory and activatory Fc␥R, and tumors are reported to be more sensitive to mAb immunotherapy in Fc␥RII Ϫ/Ϫ mice because of the removal of the inhibitory restraint of this receptor from myeloid effectors such as macro...

Therapeutic antibodies have transformed cancer therapy, unlocking mechanisms of action by engaging the immune system. Unfortunately, cures rarely occur and patients display intrinsic or acquired resistance. Here, we demonstrate the therapeutic potential of targeting human (h) FcγRIIB (CD32B), a receptor implicated in immune cell desensitization and tumor cell resistance. FcγRIIB-blocking antibodies prevented internalization of the CD20-specific antibody rituximab, thereby maximizing cell surface accessibility and immune effector cell mediated antitumor activity. In hFcγRIIB-transgenic (Tg) mice, FcγRIIB-blocking antibodies effectively deleted target cells in combination with rituximab, and other therapeutic antibodies, from resistance-prone stromal compartments. Similar efficacy was seen in primary human tumor xenografts, including with cells from patients with relapsed/refractory disease. These data support the further development of hFcγRIIB antibodies for clinical assessment.

Graphical Abstract Highlights d Anti-4-1BB IgG2a depletes intratumoral Treg cells; IgG1 promotes CD8 T cell function d The efficacy of anti-4-1BB mIgG1 and anti-4-1BB mIgG2a depends on different FcgRs d Optimal tumor therapy requires sequential anti-4-1BB IgG2a and IgG1 or PD-1 blockade d Hinge-engineered anti-4-1BB mIgG2a/h2B mAb harnesses both mechanisms of action