Phase II randomised trial of autologous tumour lysate dendritic cell plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care in pre-treated advanced colorectal cancer patients

Caballero-Baños, Miguel; Benítez‐Ribas, Daniel; Tabera, Jaime; Varea, Sara; Vilana, R.; Bianchi, Luís; Ayuso, Juan Ramón; Pagés, Mario; Carrera, G; Cuatrecasas, Míriam; Martı́n-Richard, Marta; Cid, Joan; Lozano, Miguel; Castells, Antoni; García-Albéniz, Xabier; Maurel, Joan; Vilella, Ramón

doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2016.06.008

Cited by 44 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It has been suggested that MSI causes immunogenicity of tumor cells by improving the synthesis of truncated peptides [102] thereby stimulating the adaptive immune responses of mCRC. In a phase II clinical trial, the observation that the number of TILs was higher in MSI tumors than in microsatellite stable (MSS) tumors is in accordance with this hypothesis [99,105,106]. As expected, MSI-H is an important predictive biomarker with which to select patients who may benefit from immunotherapy.…”

Section: Predictive Biomarkers In Crc Therapy and Prognosissupporting

confidence: 53%

Promising Colorectal Cancer Biomarkers for Precision Prevention and Therapy

Turano

Delrio

Rega

et al. 2019

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Colorectal cancer (CRC) has been ranked as the third most prevalent cancer worldwide. Indeed, it represents 10.2% of all cancer cases. It is also the second most common cause of cancer mortality, and accounted for about 9.2% of all cancer deaths in 2018. Early detection together with a correct diagnosis and staging remains the most effective clinical strategy in terms of disease recovery. Thanks to advances in diagnostic techniques, and improvements of surgical adjuvant and palliative therapies, the mortality rate of CRC has decreased by more than 20% in the last decade. Cancer biomarkers for the early detection of CRC, its management, treatment and follow-up have contributed to the decrease in CRC mortality. Herein, we provide an overview of molecular biomarkers from tumor tissues and liquid biopsies that are approved for use in the CRC clinical setting for early detection, follow-up, and precision therapy, and of biomarkers that have not yet been officially validated and are, nowadays, under investigation.

show abstract

Section: Predictive Biomarkers In Crc Therapy and Prognosissupporting

confidence: 53%

Promising Colorectal Cancer Biomarkers for Precision Prevention and Therapy

Turano

Delrio

Rega

et al. 2019

Cancers

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although this patient population could skew the data, our focus was the analysis of preprocedure characteristics that were associated with the CE1 of cells. The explanation to this high number of ECP procedures is because we, as do others, have seen an increase in the number of leukocytapheresis performed in non-cytokine-stimulated donors for different cellular therapy protocols during the last years [13][14][15][16] and ECP is a common procedure in the present day. 33,34 5 | CONCLUSIONS Donor's age, preprocedure CBC data as well as central line used as vascular access were factors associated with CE1 of cells when performing leukocytapheresis in nonmobilized donors for cellular therapy purposes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…11 The quantity of blood to process was one TBV for ECP procedures, according to our standard operating procedure. 12 For other cellular therapy protocols, the quantity of blood to process was calculated to obtain a target of 5 × 10 9 MNCs for generation of monocyte-derived dendritic cells, [13][14][15] 100 × 10 6 T-cells for CAR T-cells manufacturing, 16 111 × 10 6 /kg recipient for donor lymphocyte infusions, and 3 × 10 9 MNCs for the generation of virus-specific T-cells.…”

Section: Apheresismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Leukocytapheresis in nonmobilized donors for cellular therapy protocols: Evaluation of factors affecting collection efficiency of cells

Cid

Carbassé

Alba

et al. 2019

J of Clinical Apheresis

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Collection efficiency (CE1) of cells refers to the number of cells that are collected from the total number of cells processed by the apheresis device. Limited data are available about the CE1 of cells when performing leukocytapheresis in nonmobilized donors for cellular therapy purposes. The aim of our study was to evaluate donor‐ and procedure‐related characteristics that might influence the CE1 of cells. Material and Methods Variables that predicted the CE1 of cells were analyzed by longitudinal linear regression in a series of 1071 leukocytapheresis procedures on 249 nonmobilized donors. Donor‐related characteristics considered were gender, age, total blood volume, and complete blood count (CBC) data. Procedure‐related characteristics considered were vascular access and device used. Results Older donor age was associated with a decrease in the CE1 of leukocytes, lymphocytes, monocytes, and mononuclear cells (MNCs; sum of leukocytes and monocytes) and with an increase in the CE1 of platelets (P < .05). Preprocedure CBC data (leukocytes, lymphocytes, monocytes, and platelets) were associated with either a statistically significant increase or decrease in the CE1 of cells. Central line used as vascular access was associated with a statistically significant decrease in the CE1 of MNCs (P = .02). Conclusion Donor's age, preprocedure CBC data as well as central line used as vascular access were factors associated with CE1 of cells. Knowing these characteristics is helpful in the apheresis unit when designing cellular therapy protocols in order to maximize the CE1 of the desired cell and to personalize collection variables for each donor.

show abstract

“…In fact, DDA also induces an improved protective immune response against infecting pathogens and is clinically tested as a tuberculosis vaccine adjuvant . Tumor cells to be used may be autologous tumor cells obtained from patients after surgery or allogeneic tumor cell lines manufactured in large quantities . Here, highly antigenic nanoliposomes (hereafter denoted as “tumosomes”) were generated by reconstituting tumor cell membranes containing tumor‐associated antigens with two immunomodulatory adjuvants (MPLA and DDA) ( Scheme a ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multifaceted Immunomodulatory Nanoliposomes: Reshaping Tumors into Vaccines for Enhanced Cancer Immunotherapy

Noh

Kim

et al. 2017

Adv Funct Materials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The design and synthesis of nanoparticles mimicking the key features in size, shape, and surface molecular organization of biological objects that provide danger‐signals are essential in the formulation of effective vaccine. Here, multifaceted immunomodulatory nanoliposomes (denoted as “tumosomes”) that can turn tumors into vaccines and induce enhanced antitumor immune response are suggested. Multifaceted tumosomes are synthesized by assembling tumor cell membrane proteins as tumor‐associated antigens with two lipid‐based adjuvants as pathogen characters (i.e., monophosphoryl lipid A as a danger signal, dimethyldioctadecylammonium as a cell‐invasion moiety). The enhanced antitumor immunity of tumosomes afforded by the improved antigenicity and antigen uptake efficiency is also evaluated in a tumor challenge experiment after their image‐guided intralymph node injection. Tumosomes are able to provide tumor antigens and molecular adjuvants for the priming of a long‐term adaptive immune response in tumor draining lymph nodes, as well as in the spleen. Tumosome injection leads to an inhibition of tumor growth, and the survival rate of mice treated with the tumosomes is higher than those of other groups. Taken together, the tumosomes are expected to be used for the reshaping the immune response in the lymph node and enhanced antitumor immunity.

show abstract

Phase II randomised trial of autologous tumour lysate dendritic cell plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care in pre-treated advanced colorectal cancer patients

Cited by 44 publications

References 13 publications

Promising Colorectal Cancer Biomarkers for Precision Prevention and Therapy

Promising Colorectal Cancer Biomarkers for Precision Prevention and Therapy

Leukocytapheresis in nonmobilized donors for cellular therapy protocols: Evaluation of factors affecting collection efficiency of cells

Multifaceted Immunomodulatory Nanoliposomes: Reshaping Tumors into Vaccines for Enhanced Cancer Immunotherapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About