Back

Genetic editing of CISH enhances T cell effector programs independently of immune checkpoint cell surface ligand expression

Arthofer, E.; Chakraborty, K.; Viney, L.; Johnson, M. J.; Webber, B. R.; Moriarity, B. S.; Lou, E.; Choudhry, M.; Klebanoff, C. A.; Henley, T.

2021-08-17 cancer biology
10.1101/2021.08.17.456714 bioRxiv
Show abstract

PD-1 acts as a negative regulator of T cell-mediated immune responses in the setting of persistent antigen expression, including cancer and chronic pathogen infections. Antibody-mediated blockade of the PD-1/PD-L1 axis benefits a subset of patients with highly immunogenic malignancies; however, many patients fail to respond due to a requirement for expression of the cell surface ligand PD-L1 within the tumor microenvironment. CISH is a member of a new class of intra-cellular immune checkpoint molecules that function downstream of the T cell receptor to regulate antigen-specific effector functions, including reactivity to cancer neoantigens. Herein, we employed multiplex CRISPR editing of primary human T cells to systematically compare the function of CISH deletion relative to PDCD1 (the gene encoding PD-1) and/or VSIG9 (the gene encoding TIGIT) in a model of neoantigen-mediated cancer cell cytolysis. PD-1 and TIGIT disruption enhanced cytolytic activity exclusively in the setting of high PD-L1 expression. In contrast, CISH inactivation enhanced antigen-specific cytolysis of tumor cells regardless of PD-L1 expression, including outperforming PD-1 and TIGIT disruption even in the presence of high PD-L1 tumor cells. Furthermore, we observed a synergistic increase in tumor cell killing when CISH and PD-1 or TIGIT are inactivated in combination, supporting the notion that these immune checkpoints regulate non-redundant pathways of T cell activation. Together, these data demonstrate that the intra-cellular immune checkpoint protein CISH can potentially enhance anti-tumor responses against a broad range of cancer types regardless of PD-L1 biomarker status.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.