|
|
Title: Use of immunotoxins to
induce immune tolerance to pancreatic islet transplantation
United States Patent: 7,288,254
Issued: October 30, 2007
Inventors: Neville; David
M. (Bethesda, MD), Thomas; Judith T. (Birmingham, AL), Thomas; Francis T.
(Birmingham, AL)
Assignee: The United States
of America as represented by the Secretary, Department of Health and Human
Services, NIH (Washington, DC)
Appl. No.: 09/810,999
Filed: March 16, 2001
|
|
|
Executive MBA in Pharmaceutical Management, U. Colorado
|
Abstract
The invention provides a method of
treating diabetes in a subject, comprising administering to the diabetic
subject an immunotoxin, thereby reducing the subject's T-cell population,
and administering to the subject pancreatic islet cells from a donor. The
immune tolerance inducing treatment regimen, used optionally with adjunct
immunosuppressive agents, prevents pancreatic islet cell rejection while
maintaining long term islet cell function following xenogeneic and
allogeneic pancreatic islet cell transplantation. Thus, the methods of the
present invention provide a means for treating diabetes, wherein the need
for exogenous insulin or immunosuppressive agents is decreased or
eliminated. Also provided is a method of inhibiting a rejection response
of a transplant recipient, comprising administering an immunotoxin during
the peritransplant period, thereby transiently reducing the number of
T-cell lymphocytes and promoting long-term survival of the transplant.
SUMMARY OF THE
INVENTION
The invention provides a method of
treating diabetes in a subject, comprising administering to the diabetic
subject an immunotoxin, thereby reducing the subject's T-cell population,
and administering to the subject pancreatic islet cells from a donor. The
method is effective for treating Type I or Type II diabetes. More
specifically, the invention provides a short course immune tolerance
inducing treatment regimen utilizing an anti-CD3 immunotoxin that,
optionally with adjunct immunosuppressive agents, prevents pancreatic
islet cell rejection while maintaining long term islet cell function
following pancreatic islet cell transplantation. The invention further
provides sufficient immune tolerance to pancreatic islet transplantation
so that xenogeneic transplants are not rejected. Thus, the methods of the
present invention provide a means for treating diabetes, wherein the need
for exogenous insulin or immunosuppressive agents is eliminated.
A method of inducing immune tolerance using an immunotoxin for xenogeneic
or allogeneic pancreatic islet cell transplantation is provided. Also
provided is a method of inhibiting a rejection response of a transplant
recipient, comprising administering an immunotoxin during the
peritransplant period, thereby transiently reducing the number of T-cell
lymphocytes and promoting long-term survival of the transplant.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
OF THE INVENTION
The current invention provides a short
course immune tolerance inducing treatment regimen utilizing an anti-CD3
immunotoxin that, optionally with adjunct immunosuppressive agents,
prevents pancreatic islet cell rejection while maintaining long term islet
cell function. A unique feature of the present immunotoxin immune
tolerance induction is that the ratio of target cell toxicity (T cell) to
non-target cell toxicity (islet cell) is extremely high. The adjunct
immunosuppressive agents, which can also be used and which can cause islet
cell toxicity, such as cyclosporine and corticosteroid derivatives, are
required only for a brief duration due to the power of the primary
immunotoxin promoting immune tolerance.
The invention provides a method of treating diabetes in a subject,
comprising administering to the diabetic subject an immunotoxin, thereby
reducing the subject's T-cell population, and administering to the subject
pancreatic islet cells from a donor. Specifically, the method is effective
for treating Type I or Type II diabetes. By "diabetes" is meant diabetes
mellitus, a metabolic disease characterized by a deficiency or absence of
insulin secretion or responsivity of peripheral tissues to insulin. As
used throughout, "diabetes" includes Type I, Type II, Type III, and Type
IV diabetes mellitus unless specified otherwise.
Unexpectedly, the immune tolerance induction regimen of the invention
successfully reverses type II diabetes in monkeys. The reversal of the
insulin resistant state in non-human primates suffering from type II
diabetes implies that the peripheral insulin resistance seen in this
disease is, in some way, mediated by faulty islet function, and this
condition can be largely reversed by healthy grafted islets. The present
invention can reduce or eliminate the need for insulin replacement in the
subject with Type I diabetes as well. In the case of both Type I and Type
II, non-fasting blood glucose levels will preferably be maintained below
160 mg/dl upon completion of the immune tolerance induction regimen.
By "pancreatic islet cells" is meant a composition comprising pancreatic
islet cells. Preferably the pancreatic islet cells can be transplanted by
injection of the cells into the portal vein; however, other cell, tissue,
and organ transplantation paradigms well known in the art can be used. It
is comtemplated that the immunotherapeutic function of the present
immunotolerance tolerance induction regimen can be applied to
transplantation of all or part of the pancreas as well as to the
transplantation of pancreatic islet cells.
The "donor" can be a cadaver or a living donor. Furthermore, the donor can
be of the same species as the subject being treated or a different species
than the subject being treated. Thus, using the method of the invention,
transplantation can be performed across primate species (i.e., xenogeneic
transplantation or xenograft) and within the same primate line (i.e.,
allogeneic transplantation or allograft). It was not obvious until this
invention that the highly sensitive pancreatic islet xenografts would
maintain function in the presence of this immune tolerance inducing
regimen. Nor was it obvious that this regimen would permit an islet
transplantation crossing species lines.
The invention further provides an immune tolerance inducing regimen,
wherein a population of the pancreatic islet cells to be transplanted are
modified to decrease antigenicity prior to transplantation. Specifically,
the donor cells can be altered, such as by genetically engineering the
donor or donor cells, to reduce pancreatic islet cell antigenicity or to
reduce the susceptibility of pancreatic islet cells to immune injury (R.
Weiss, Nature 391: 327 28 (1998)).
The "subject" being treated can include individual humans, domesticated
animals, livestock (e.g., cattle, horses, pigs, etc.), and pets (e.g.,
cats and dogs).
The invention further provides a method, wherein the immunotoxin
transiently reduces the subject's T cells in the blood and lymph nodes by
at least one log unit. Preferably the number of T cells in the blood and
lymph nodes will be transiently decreased by 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1, 1.1, 1.2,
1.3, 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8, 1.9, 2 log units, or any interval amount
between 0.7 and 2 log units.
By "transiently reduces" is meant that T cells are reduced by 0.7 to 2 log
units in the blood and lymph compartments for at least four days before
starting to return to normal levels.
The present method of inducing immune tolerance or treating diabetes
further comprises administering an immunosuppressive agent to the subject.
The immunosuppressive agents can be administered beginning 24 to 0 hours
prior to administration of the pancreatic islet cells to the recipient and
continuing up to two weeks thereafter. Preferably, the immunosuppressive
agents can be administered for at least 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14 days, or any interval time. The immunosuppressive agent is selected
from the group consisting of cyclosporine, mycophenolate moefitil, methyl
prednisolone, deoxyspergualin, other known immunosuppressive agents, and
any combination thereof The immunotoxin regimen allows short-term
immunosuppressive therapy and eliminates the need for long-term treatment
with immunosuppressives, thereby avoiding the side effects associated with
chronic immunosuppression.
The immunotoxin is administered beginning at 24 to 0 hours before
administration of the pancreatic islet cells and continuing up to several
days thereafter. Preferably, the immunotoxin is administered for 1, 2, or
3 days or any time in between. It is contemplated that immunotoxin
administration of 4, 5, 6, or 7 days can be used if the production of
antitoxin antibodies, which begins after approximately 5 days of
administration, can be addressed. The immunotoxin can be administered in
subjects beginning anytime after administration of the pancreatic islet
cells. Thus, it is contemplated that a subject with a long term surviving
transplant, who have not previously received immunotoxin treatment, could
still benefit from immunotoxin administration, thereby avoiding the need
for long-term treatment with immunosuppressives. It is further
contemplated that a transplant recipient who begins to show signs of
rejection may benefit from immunotoxin administration to reduce or
eliminate the rejection process.
The invention further provides a method of inhibiting a rejection response
of a recipient of a pancreatic islet transplant by inducing immune
tolerance in the recipient, comprising administering an immunotoxin during
the peritransplant period, thereby transiently reducing the number of
T-cell lymphocytes and promoting long-term survival of the transplant. By
"peritransplant period" is meant the period between 24 hours prior to and
2 weeks after transplantation.
Because of the close similarities between the immune functions that govern
graft acceptance and rejection within primates and the similar functions
of the pancreata within primates, this tolerance induction regimen is
considered likely to succeed in humans for the treatment of diabetes via
islet transplantation.
The immunotoxin can be a divalent anti-T cell immunotoxin, such as
UCHT1-CRM9. More specifically, the divalent anti-T cell immunotoxin can be
a single chain engineered fusion protein comprising an amino-terminus DT
based toxin domain fused to a sFv domain (VL-linker-VH where linker is
(Gly4Ser)3 separated by a second linker and fused to a second identical
sFv domain. The second linker can be (Gly4Ser)3 or (Gly4Ser)5.
Alternatively, the single chain engineered fusion protein can be
monovalent providing that the linker and the VL and VH sequence are
carefully chosen to provide an affinity lying within .+-.0.5 log unit of
the parental antibody affinity.
The divalent disulfide linked immunotoxin can have identical components.
Alternatively, the components can be non-identical with only one toxin
moiety to minimize stearic hindrance of the antigen binding domains. The
divalent anti-T cell immunotoxin can be a disulfide dimer of two
monovalent single chain engineered fusion proteins that are dimerized via
the hinge region of IgG1 or the .mu.CH2 domain of IgM. The dimer can be a
homo dimer comprising two monovalent units of DT390-sFv-H-.gamma. CH3,
disulfide dimerized by the single or double cysteine residues in H the
hinge region. The dimer alternatively can be a heterodimer comprising one
monovalent unit of DT390-sFv-H-.gamma.CH3, disulfide dimerized by the
single or double cysteine residues in H to a monovalent unit of sFv-H-.gamma.CH3.
Dimerization can be achieved in vivo by expression in a eukaryotic
expression system modified for toxin resistance by an EF2 mutation.
Examples are mutated CHO cells, Ss9 insect cells, or mutated yeasts.
Alternatively, dimerization can be performed in vitro from monovalent
species produced in prokaryote expression systems by the use of disulfide
interchange reactions employing suitable disulfide oxidation systems such
as dithiobisnitrobenzoic acid used to generate mixed disulfide
intermediates.
The divalent anti-T cell immunotoxin can comprise a toxin moiety and a
targeting moiety directed to the T cell CD3.di-elect cons. epitope. Even
more specifically, the toxin moiety can be a diphtheria toxin binding site
mutant. The immunotoxin can comprise a mutant toxin moiety (e.g., DT toxin
or ETA toxin) linked to a single chain (sc) variable region antibody
moiety (targeting moiety). Thus, the invention utilizes an immunotoxin
having recombinantly produced antibody moiety linked (coupled) to a
recombinantly produced toxin moiety and a fusion immunotoxin (where both
toxin and antibody domains are produced from a recombinant construct). As
the application provides the necessary information regarding the
arrangement of toxin and antibody domains, and the sub regions within
them, it will be recognized that any number or chemical coupling or
recombinant DNA methods can be used to generate an immunotoxin. Thus,
reference to a fusion toxin or a coupled toxin is not necessarily
limiting.
The antibody moiety preferably routes by the anti-CD3 pathway. The
immunotoxin can be monovalent, but divalent antibody moieties are
presently preferred since they have been found to enhance cell killing by
about 3 to 15 fold. The immunotoxin can be a fusion protein produced
recombinantly. The immunotoxin can be made by chemical thioether linkage
at unique sites of a recombinantly produced divalent antibody (targeting
moiety) and a recombinantly produced mutant toxin moiety. The targeting
moiety of the immunotoxin can comprise the human .mu.CH2, .gamma.CH3 and
.mu.CH4 regions and VL and VH regions from murine Ig antibodies. These
regions can be from the antibody UCHT1 so that the antibody moiety is
scUCHT1, which is a single chain CD3.di-elect cons. antibody having human
.mu.CH2, .gamma.CH3 and .mu.CH4 regions and mouse variable regions. These
are believed to be the first instances of sc anti-CD3 antibodies. Numerous
DT mutant toxin moieties are described herein, for example DT390 or
extensions of DT390 out to DT530. Thus, as just one specific example the
immunotoxin, the invention provides scUCHT1-DT390. Derivatives of this
immunotoxin are designed and constructed as described herein.
The engineered divalent immunotoxin utilized in the present invention can
be stabilized with respect to divalency and disulfide bond initiation by
the interactive Ig domains of either human IgM .mu.CH2 or IgGI .gamma.CH3
or other similar Ig interactive domains.
In the present invention, the toxin moiety retains its toxic function and
membrane translocation function to the cytosol in full amounts. The loss
in binding function located in the receptor binding domain of the toxin
protein diminishes systemic toxicity by reducing binding to non-target
cells. Thus, the immunotoxin can be safely administered. The routing
function normally supplied by the toxin binding function is supplied by
the targeting antibody, for example, anti-CD3. The essential routing
pathway is (1) localization to coated pits for endocytosis, (2) escape
from lysosomal routing, and (3) return to the plasma membrane.
The mutant DT toxin moiety can be a truncated mutant, such as DT390,
extensions of DT390 out to DT530, or other truncated mutants, as well as a
full length toxin with point mutations or CRM9 (cloned in C. ulcerans),
scUCHT1 fusion proteins with DTM1 and DT483. DT390 has been cloned and
expressed in E. coli. The toxin domain can be CRM9 (DT535, S525F) plus a
second attenuating mutation from the group: F530A, K516E, K516A, Y514A,
V523A, N524A). The antibody moiety can be scUCHT1 or other anti-CD3
antibody having the routing and other characteristics described in detail
herein. Thus, one example of an immunotoxin for use in the present methods
is the fusion-protein immunotoxin DT390sSvUCHT1. In principal, described
immunotoxins can be used in the methods of the invention.
The immunotoxin or components thereof can be expressed in E. coli BL21DE3
cytosol using TrxB.sup.-strains at 15 to 25.degree. C. Alternatively, the
immunotoxin or components thereof can be expressed in eukaryotic cell
lines (such as CHO), insect cell lines (such as Ss9), and yeast cell lines
(such as Pichia pastoris) provided that the toxin glycosylation sites at
residues 16 and 235 are eliminated and the cells have been mutated to
resist ADP-ribosylation catalyzed by toxin, by a Gly to Arg substitution 2
residues to the carboxyl side of the modified amino acid diphthamide. In
the case of insect cells this mutant EF-2 can be supplied in the same
baculovirus vector supplying the immunotoxin gene since two late promoters
are available in baculovirus.
The recombinant immunotoxins can be produced from recombinant sc divalent
antibody or recombinant dicystronic divalent antibody and recombinant
mutant toxins each containing a single unpaired cysteine residue. An
advantage of this method is that the toxins are easily produced and
properly folded by their native bacteria while the antibodies are better
produced and folded in eukaryote cells. In addition, this addresses
differences in coding preferences between eukaryotes and prokaryotes which
can be troublesome with some immunotoxin fusion proteins.
The general principles for producing the present divalent recombinant
anti-T cell immunotoxins are:
1. The disulfide bond bridging the two monovalent chains is chosen from a
natural Ig domain, for example from .mu.CH2 (C337 of residues 228 340 or
the .gamma.IgG hinge region, C226 or C229 or both of residues 216 238
[with C220P]).
2. Sufficient non-covalent interaction between the monovalent chains is
supplied by including domains having high affinity interactions and close
crystallographic or solution contacts, such as .mu.CH2, .mu.CH4 (residues
447 576) or .gamma.CH3 (residues 376 446). These non-covalent interactions
facilitate proper folding for formation of the interchain disulfide bond.
3. For fusion immunotoxins the orientation of the antibody to the toxin is
chosen so that the catalytic domain of the toxin moiety becomes a free
entity when it undergoes proteolysis at its natural processing site under
reducing conditions. Thus, in the ETA based IT, the toxin moiety is at the
carboxy terminus and, in DT based fusion IT, the DT based toxin moiety is
at the amino terminus of the fusion protein.
4. For chemically coupled immunotoxins, a single cysteine is inserted
within the toxin binding domain. The antibody is engineered to have only a
single free cysteine per chain which projects into the solvent away from
interchain contacts such as .mu.CH3 414, .mu.CH4 575 or the addition to
.gamma.CH3 at C447. Crystal structure indicates this region is highly
solvent accessible. Excess free cysteines are converted to alanine.
Alternatively, a C terminal cysteine can be added to .gamma.CH3 directly
following a histidine tag for purification, .gamma.CH3 (His)6Cys.
5. Toxins are mutated in their binding domain by point mutations,
insertions or deletions, have at least a 1000 fold reduction in binding
activity over wild type, and are free of translocation defects.
6. Toxin binding site mutants, if not capable of proteolytic processing at
neutral pH, are modified in the processing region to achieve this result.
A binding site mutant (CRM9) of full length diphtheria toxin residues 1
535 using the numbering system described by Kaczovek et al. (56) S525F
(57) can be further modified for chemical coupling by changing a residue
in the binding domain (residues 379 535) to cysteine. Presently preferred
residues are those with exposed solvent areas greater than 38%. These
residues are K516, V518, D519, H520, T521, V523, K526, F530, E532, K534
and S535 (57). Of these K516 and F530 are presently preferred since they
are likely to block any residual binding activity (57). However, maximal
coupling of the new cysteine residue will be enhanced by the highest
exposed solvent surface and proximity to a positively charged residue
(which has the effect of lowering cysteine--SH pKa). These residues are at
D519 and S535 so that these are presently preferred from the above list of
possibilities.
A double mutant of DT containing the S525F mutation of CRM9 plus an
additional replacement within the 514 525 exposed binding site loop to
introduce a cysteine coupling site for example T521C can be produced in
Corynebacterium ulcerans preceded by the CRM9 promoter and signal
sequence. The double mutant is made in Corynebacterium ulcerans by a
recombination event between the plasmid producing CRM9-antibody fusion
protein and PCR generated mutant DNA with a stop codon at 526 (gapped
plasmid mutagenesis). Alternatively, double attenuating mutants of
diphtheria toxin can be produced in E. coli BL21DE3 TrxB.sup.- by PCR
mutagenesis without the use of a signal sequence. These CRM9-Cs can be
used to form specific thioether mutant toxin divalent antibody constructs
by adding excess bismaleimidohexane to CRM9-Cs and coupling to single
chain divalent antibody containing a free cysteine at either the end of
the .mu.CH4 domain or the .gamma.CH3 domain (see Ser. No. 08/739,703,
hereby incorporated by reference).
These and other mutations are accomplished by gapped plasmid PCR
mutagenesis (58) using the newly designed E. coli/C. ulcerans shuttle
vector yCE96 containing either the double mutant DT S508F S525F or a CRM9
COOH terminus fusion protein construct having reduced toxicity due to the
COOH terminal added protein domain (59).
The mutated toxins are produced and purified analogously to the parent
toxin except that low levels of reducing agent (equivalent to 2 mM
betamercaptoethanol) are included in the purification to protect the
unpaired introduced --SH group. Thioether chemical coupling is achieved to
a single unpaired cysteine within the divalent antibody construct at
either residue 414 in domain .gamma.CH-3 or residue 575 in domain .mu.CH4
when this domain is included. In this case domain .gamma.CH-3 is mutated
C414A to provide only a single coupling site. An advantage of including
.mu.CH4 is enhanced stability of the divalent antibody. A disadvantage is
that the extra domain increases size and thereby reduces the secretion
efficiency during antibody production. The advantage of terminating with
the .gamma.CH3 domain is that, in another variant, a His6 purification tag
can be added at either the .mu.CH2 COOH or .gamma.CH3 COOH terminus to
facilitate antibody purification. Another variant is to use the .gamma.
hinge region to form the interchain disulfide and to couple through a
.gamma.CH3 or .mu.CH4. This variant has the advantage of being smaller in
size and places the toxin moiety closer to the CD3 epitope binding
domains, which could increase toxin membrane translocation efficiency. A
His tag can be included at the carboxy terminus as a purification aid.
SH-CRM9 is concentrated to 10 mg/ml in PBS pH 8.5 and reacted with a 15
fold molar excess of bismaleimidohexane (BW (Pierce, Rockford, Ill.).
Excess BMH is removed by passing over a small G25F column (Pharmacia,
Piscataway, N.J.). The maleimide derived toxin at about 5 mg/ml is now
added to scUCHT1 divalent antibody at 10 mg/ml at room temperature. After
1 hr the conjugate is separated from non-reactive starting products by
size exclusion HPLC on a 2 inch by 10 inch MODcol column packed with
Zorbax (DuPont) GF250 6 micron resin (for large scale production).
Derivatives of ETA60EF61cys161 are also coupled to scUCHT1 divalent
antibody by the same method.
Divalent anti-T cell fusion immunotoxins based on DT can be utilized in
the invention, wherein the toxin domain (also referred to herein as "toxin
moiety" or "tox") is either full length mutant S525F (CRM9) or truncated
at 390 or 486 (collectively Tox) and the sequence of domains from the
amino terminus from left to right can be selected from among the following
and may include C terminal or amino terminal His purification tags: VL and
VH are the variable light and heavy domains of the anti-CD3 antibody UCHT1
or other anti-CD3 antibody. H is the human IgG1 hinge.
Single chain divalent fusion protein: Tox, VL, L, VH, L, VL, L, VH;
Single chain univalent fusion protein homodimerized via .mu.CH2 337 Cys: (Tox,
VL, L, VH, .mu.CH2)2;
Single chain univalent fusion protein homodimerized via H 226/229 Cys: (Tox,
VL, L, VH, H, .gamma.CH3)2;
Single chain univalent fusion protein heterodimerized via .mu.CH2 337 Cys:
(Tox, VL, L, VH, .mu.CH2 VL, L, VH, .mu.CH2);
Single chain univalent fusion protein heterodimerized via H 226/229 Cys: (Tox,
VL, L, VH, H, .gamma.CH3 VL, L, VH, H, .gamma.CH3);
sFv-SH fusion protein homodimerized via H 226/229 Cys chemically linked
via a bis maleimide (R) to a SH derivatized CRM9 or a CRM9 containing an
engineered C terminal cysteine (Tox): VL, L, VH, H, .gamma.CH3, His6,
Cys-SH-R-SH-Tox.
Other types of protein toxin moieties can be utilized in anti-T cell
immunotoxins for the induction of tolerance. All that is required is that
a 1-2 log kill of T cells within the blood and lymph node compartments can
be achieved without undue systemic toxicity. This in turn requires that
the routing epitope routes in parallel with the toxin intoxication pathway
and that binding site mutants are available or that toxins truncated in
their binding domain are available that reduce toxin binding by 1000 fold
compared to wild type toxins without compromising toxin translocation
efficiency (see U.S. Pat. No. 5,167,956 issued Dec. 1, 1992). In addition
when using targeting via antibodies, divalent antibodies are generally
required under in vivo conditions to achieve sufficient cell killing due
to the 3 to 15 fold lower affinity of monovalent antibodies. However, the
method of linking the toxin to the divalent antibody either as a single
chain fusion protein or through specific engineered coupling sites must
not interfere with translocation efficiency. This could occur due to the
larger size of many divalent antibodies compared to monovalent scFv
antibodies unless care is taken so that the catalytic domain of the toxin
can achieve unencumbered translocation. This is achieved for DT based
immunotoxins using DT based binding site mutants where the fusion protein
antibody moiety is contiguous with the COOH terminus of the toxin binding
chain as described above. This allows the catalytic a chain to translocate
as soon as the disulfide loop spanning the Arg/Ser proteolytic processing
site residues 193/194 is reduced. Most targeted cells are capable of
performing this processing event, and when chemically coupled CRM9 is used
the processing is performed by trypsin prior to coupling.
If the toxin moiety is based on full length diphtheria toxin, it can
include the following mutations:
S525F, K530C
S525F, K516C
S525F, D519C
S525F, S535C.
The antibody-toxin constructs utilized in the invention can be expected to
be effective as immunotoxins because the relevant parameters are known.
The following discussion of parameters is relevant to the use of the
immunotoxin in tolerance induction. The relevant binding constants, number
of receptors and translocation rates for humans have been determined and
used. Binding values for anti-CD3-CRM9 for targeted and non-targeted cells
in vitro and rates of translocation for the anti-CD3-CRM9 conjugate to
targeted and non-targeted cells in vitro are described (Greenfield et is
al. (1987) Science 238:536; Johnson et al. (1988) J. Biol. Chem. 263:1295;
Johnson et al. (1989) J. Neurosurg. 70:240; and Neville et al. (1989) J.
Biol. Chem. 264:14653). The rate limiting translocation rate to targeted
cells in vitro is shown as follows: an anti-CD3 -CRM9 conjugate at
10.sup.-11 M is translocated to about 75% of the target cells present as
measured by inhibition of protein synthesis in about 75% of cells with 20
hours. Inhibition of protein synthesis is complete in cells into which the
conjugate translocates.
Parameters determined in in vivo studies in nude mice include the
following: Tumor burden is described in Example 1 as a constant mass equal
to 0.1% of body weight; the receptor number and variation of receptor
number are described in Example 3; "favorable therapeutic margin" is
defined as an in vivo target cell 3 log kill at 0.5 MLD (minimum lethal
dose)-comparison of efficacy with an established treatment of 0.5 MLD
immunotoxin equivalent (group 1) to a radiation dose of 500 600 cGy
(groups 8 and 9).
The parameters determined in vitro allowed the prediction of success in
the in vivo nude mouse study. The prediction of in vivo success was
verified by the data in Examples 3 4. Using the target cell number from
the mouse study as being equivalent to the local T cell burden in a monkey
or man successful T cell ablation and immunosuppression in monkeys could
be predicted. This prediction has been verified by the monkey data in
Example 5. Using the same parameters, a scientist skilled in this field
can make a prediction of success in humans with confidence, because these
parameters have been previously shown to have predictive success.
Most human sera contain anti-DT neutralizing antibodies from childhood
immunization. To compensate for this the therapeutic dose of anti-CD3-CRM9
can be appropriately raised without affecting the therapeutic margin.
Alternatively, a non-toxic DT mutants reactive with neutralizing antisera
(e.g., CRM197) that can be administered in conjunction with the
immunotoxin. See U.S. Pat. No. 5,725,857, the content of which is
incorporated herein by reference.
One embodiment to the invention provides a method of inhibiting a
rejection response by inducing immune tolerance in a recipient to a
foreign donor pancreatic islet cell by exposing the recipient to an
immunotoxin so as to reduce the recipients's peripheral blood T-cell
lymphocyte population by at least 80%, and preferably 95% or higher,
wherein the immunotoxin is an anti-CD3 antibody linked to a diphtheria
protein toxin, and wherein the protein has a binding site mutation. The
term "donor cell" refers to a donor pancreatic islet cell or cells, as
distinguished from donor lymphocytes or donor bone marrow. When the donor
pancreatic islet cells are transplanted into the recipient, a rejection
response by the recipient to the donor cells is inhibited and the
recipient is tolerized to the donor organ or cell. Alternatively, a
non-toxic DT mutant such as DTM2 or CRM197 can first be administered
followed by the immunotoxin. This method can use any of the immunotoxins
(e.g., anti-CD3-CRM9, scUCH1-DT390, etc.) or non-toxic-DT mutants
described herein with the dosages and modes of administration as described
herein or otherwise determined by the practitioner.
The present tolerance induction method can also include administering an
immunosuppressant compound before, at the same time, or after the
immunotoxin exposure step. The immunosuppressant compound can be
cyclosporine (e.g., cyclosporine A) or other cyclophylins, mycophenolate
moefitil (Roche), methyl prednisone, deoxyspergualin (Bristol Myers),
FK506, other known immunosuppressants, or any combination thereof. It will
be appreciated that certain of these immunosuppressants have major effects
on cytokine release occurring in the peritransplant period that may aid in
the induction of the tolerant state. The method of inducing immune
tolerance can further comprise administering donor bone marrow at the same
time or after the exposure step.
Any one, two, or more of these adjunct therapies can be used together in
the present tolerance induction method. Thus, the invention includes at
least six methods of inducing tolerance using immunotoxin (IT): (1)
tolerance induction by administering IT alone; (2) tolerance induction by
administering IT plus other drugs that alter immune function such as high
dose corticosteroids; (3) tolerance induction by administering IT plus
immunosuppressant drugs, such as mycophenolate mofetil and/or
deoxyspergualin; (4) tolerance induction by administering IT plus other
drugs that alter immune function, plus immunosuppressant drugs; (5)
tolerance induction by administering IT and bone marrow; and (6) tolerance
induction by administering IT plus bone marrow, plus immunosuppressant
drugs. The adjunct therapy can be administered before, at the same time or
after the administration of immunotoxin. Different adjunct therapies can
be administered to the recipient at different times or at the same time in
relation to the transplant event or the administration of immunotoxin, as
further described below.
Because the immunosuppressant can be administered before the immunotoxin
and/or other treatments, the present method can be used with a patient
that has undergone an organ transplant and is on an immunosuppressant
regimen. This presents a significant opportunity to reduce or eliminate
traditional immunosuppressant therapy and its well documented negative
side-effects. Also, as described below, treatment with immunosuppressants
prior to transplantation could be particularly useful in cadaveric and
xenogeneic transplants. In such a setting of pre-transplant treatment with
immunosuppressant, the administration of immunotoxin can be delayed for up
to seven or more days post-transplantation.
An example of a schedule of immunotoxin and immunosuppressant
administration for patients receiving organ transplants is as follows: day
-24 to -0 hours: begin immunosuppressant treatment; day 0: perform
transplant; day 0: immediately following transplant administer 1st
immunotoxin dose; day 1: 2nd immunotoxin dose; day 2: 3rd and final
immunotoxin dose. Immunosuppressant treatment may end at day 3 or extend
to day 14. Immunosuppressant treatment is also effective if begun at the
time of transplantation, and can continue for up to two weeks after
transplantation.
The presently preferred doses of the immunotoxin are those sufficient to
deplete peripheral blood T-cell levels to 80%, preferably 90% (or
especially preferably 95% or higher) of preinjection levels. This should
require mg/kg levels for humans similar to those for monkeys (e.g., 0.05
mg/kg to 0.3 mg/kg body weight), which toxicity studies indicate should be
well tolerated by humans. Thus, the immunotoxin can be administered to
safely reduce the recipients T cell population.
Claim 1 of 8 Claims
1. A method of transplanting cadaveric
donor pancreatic islet cells to a subject in need thereof, comprising (a)
administering to the subject a divalent anti-T cell diphtheria toxin
binding site mutant immunotoxin directed at the CD3 epitope during the
peritransplant period, thereby reducing the subject's T-cell population;
(b) administering deoxyspergualin to the subject; and (c) administering to
the subject pancreatic islet cells from a cadaveric donor.
____________________________________________
If you want to learn more
about this patent, please go directly to the U.S.
Patent and Trademark Office Web site to access the full
patent.
|