Independent education resourceInformation here does not replace care from a qualified health professional.
Peptide Therapy GuideClear peptide education

Educational guide

Lion Biotechnologies, MD Anderson Plan Clinical Trials of TIL Cancer Therapy

Lion Biotechnologies will partner with The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center to carry out multiarm clinical trials assessing the company’s tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy in ovarian cancer, various sarcomas, and pancreatic cancer, throu

Written by Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team
For education only

This guide cannot diagnose a condition or recommend a personal treatment plan. Discuss medical questions with a qualified professional.

Lion Biotechnologies will partner with The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center to carry out multiarm clinical trials assessing the company’s tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) therapy in ovarian cancer, various sarcomas, and pancreatic cancer, through a collaboration whose value was not disclosed.

The multiyear strategic alliance will evaluate TIL therapy in multiple solid tumor cancers using two different TIL manufacturing processes. Lion and MD Anderson will both have manufacturing responsibilities for production of TILs used in the planned cellular therapy trials.

“Together, we expect to generate data that will support the pursuit of additional pipeline indications to complement our ongoing Lion-sponsored TIL clinical programs in metastatic melanoma, head and neck, and cervical cancers,” Lion president and CEO Maria Fardis, Ph.D., MBA, said in a statement.

Dr. Fardis said the collaboration is designed to combine Lion's expertise in TIL therapy and expanding TIL manufacturing capacity with MD Anderson's experience in developing novel methods for generating TIL, and in clinical care in treating oncology patients with unmet needs.

The trials will be designed by a joint steering committee of professionals from Lion and MD Anderson, and will be conducted at MD Anderson.

A related preclinical research collaboration will focus on the expansion of TIL from additional rare tumor types, with the goal of identifying new indications for future clinical research.

Lion’s lead product candidate is an adoptive cell therapy that applies TIL toward treating patients with refractory metastatic melanoma.

Lion's technology is based on TILs isolated from the patient's tumor following resection. The cells are expanded to billions in vitro, then infused back into the patient, who has been preconditioned to remove all suppressive influences.

The technology is designed to overcome the immunosuppressive effects of cancer, while leveraging and enhancing the power of TILs to treat, and potentially cure, all solid tumors. In cancer’s early stages, TILs migrate to the tumor and launch an attack—but the effect is usually short-lived because cancer adapts to evade immune detection and suppress immune response.

TIL therapy is also being evaluated in clinical trials at the National Cancer Institute, MD Anderson, and H. Lee Moffitt Cancer & Research Institute, using an adoptive cell therapy regimen developed by NCI chief of surgery Steven A. Rosenberg, M.D., Ph.D.

One Phase II study involving 101 patients with metastatic melanoma conducted by Dr. Rosenberg associated TIL treatment with high, durable, objective response rates, including patients who were refractory to checkpoint inhibitors.

The data showed complete responses in 24% of patients, with 23 of 24 complete responders showing durability of 30 to 47 months. The overall response rate was 56% and overall survival was approximately 80% at 12 months. In addition, the complete response rate was 29% for 34 patients that had failed therapy with checkpoint inhibitors.

Lion’s technologies also include genetically engineered and presorted “next-generation” TILs. Their advantages, the company says, include greater potency and persistence, a shorter manufacturing process with lower cost of goods, fewer cells, stronger intellectual property protection, and cytokine expression that enhances modulation of the immune-suppressing proteins programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) and cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA-4).

Connected reading

Helpful context for this guide

Source-derived material selected through this article’s indexed topics.

Related questions

01How stable is the antibody?

A crucial question often addressed during preclinical development focuses on the in vivo stability of therapeutic antibodies. Increasing the half-life of a therapeutic antibody has several benefits ranging from higher treatment efficacy to increased advantages for the patients who will have a fewer number of therapy sessions and a reduced cost. Given these compelling benefits, following the identification of therapeutic antibodies with the desired specificity, developers usually subject them to a refinement step to increase their stability. This process is often hindered by the lack of reliable experimental tools to predict the half-life of antibodies in patients. The major hurdle of using mouse models to predict antibody stability in the serum lies in the way immunoglobulin proteins are processed by the organism. In mammals, most proteins circulating in the serum undergo constant uptake by endothelial cells and are routed through the endosomes to the lysosomal compartment for degradation. In the endosomes, immunoglobulin G (IgG) proteins are recognized and bound by a transmembrane protein, called the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn), which mediates their recycling to the plasma membrane and subsequent release back into the serum. As a result, the half-life of IgGs are significantly extended by this mechanism. Since most therapeutic antibodies belong to the IgG class, this recycling system is very relevant for their relative stability in the body. Remarkably, the relative affinity between IgGs and FcRn is extremely disparate between different species, with the mouse receptor showing a much higher affinity than its human counterpart.

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
02Undruggable or unscreenable?

Another obstacle to discovering new PPI inhibitors is the lack of libraries designed to hunt for them, points out Philippe Roche, PhD, senior scientist at the Integrative Structural and Chemical Biology team at the Cancer Research Center of Marseilles, France. “If you screen PPIs using libraries that were designed for kinases or GPCRs, that’s why you don’t get a lot of good results,” he says. To that end, his group began assembling a library focused on orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs. The result was 2P2Idb, a hand-curated, structural database cataloguing orthosteric inhibitors of PPIs for which the interface had been 3D characterized. From analyzing these known PPI inhibitors, and what structures they had in common, Roche and his colleagues developed a model to predict whether compounds would likely inhibit PPIs. Using this method, 2P2Idb creates an enriched screening library that dramatically increases the hit rate compared to standard libraries. Having proven their success with a small library of 1600 compounds, they are in the process of expanding the library to 10,000 compounds. Once that’s published, “the idea is to make this library available to labs around the world,” Roche says. “We will provide the library free of charge for people to be able to screen PPI targets.”

Source: www.genengnews.com ↗
P

About the author

Peptide Therapy Guide Editorial Team

Editorial team for Peptide Therapy Guide.

View all articles →