Preclinical efficacy and pharmacokinetics of an RNA-encoded T cell-engaging bispecific antibody targeting human claudin 6.

We present the preclinical pharmacology of BNT142, a lipid nanoparticle (LNP)-formulated RNA (RNA-LNP) encoding a T cell-engaging bispecific antibody that monovalently binds the T cell marker CD3 and bivalently binds claudin 6 (CLDN6), an oncofetal antigen that is absent from normal adult tissue but expressed on various solid tumors. Upon BNT142 RNA-LNP delivery in cell culture, mice, and cynomolgus monkeys, RNA is translated, followed by self-assembly into and secretion of the functional bispecific antibody RiboMab02.1. In vitro, RiboMab02.1 mediated CLDN6 target cell-specific activation and proliferation of T cells, and potent target cell killing. In mice and cynomolgus monkeys, intravenously administered BNT142 RNA-LNP maintained therapeutic serum concentrations of the encoded antibody. Concentrations of RNA-encoded RiboMab02.1 were maintained longer in circulation in mice than concentrations of directly injected, sequence-identical protein. Weekly injections of mice with BNT142 RNA-LNP in the 0.1- to 1-µg dose range were sufficient to eliminate CLDN6-positive subcutaneous human xenograft tumors and increase survival over controls. Tumor regression was associated with an influx of T cells and depletion of CLDN6-positive cells. BNT142 induced only transient and low cytokine production in CLDN6-positive tumor-bearing mice humanized with peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). No signs of adverse effects from BNT142 RNA-LNP administration were observed in mice or cynomolgus monkeys. On the basis of these and other findings, a phase 1/2 first-in-human clinical trial has been initiated to assess the safety and preliminary efficacy of BNT142 RNA-LNP in patients with CLDN6-positive advanced solid tumors (NCT05262530).

Dual-platform affinity proteomics identifies links between the recurrence of ovarian carcinoma and proteins released into the tumor microenvironment.

The peritoneal fluid (ascites), replete with abundant tumor-promoting factors and extracellular vesicles (EVs) reflecting the tumor secretome, plays an essential role in ovarian high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) metastasis and immune suppression. A comprehensive picture of mediators impacting HGSC progression is, however, not available. Methods: Proteins in ascites from HGSC patients were quantified by the aptamer-based SOMAscan affinity proteomic platform. SOMAscan data were analyzed by bioinformatic methods to reveal clinically relevant links and functional connections, and were validated using the antibody-based proximity extension assay (PEA) Olink platform. Mass spectrometry was used to identify proteins in extracellular microvesicles released by HGSC cells. Results: Consistent with the clinical features of HGSC, 779 proteins in ascites identified by SOMAscan clustered into groups associated either with metastasis and a short relapse-free survival (RFS), or with immune regulation and a favorable RFS. In total, 346 proteins were linked to OC recurrence in either direction. Reanalysis of 214 of these proteins by PEA revealed an excellent median Spearman inter-platform correlation of ρ=0.82 for the 46 positively RFS-associated proteins in both datasets. Intriguingly, many proteins strongly associated with clinical outcome were constituents of extracellular vesicles. These include proteins either linked to a poor RFS, such as HSPA1A, BCAM and DKK1, or associated with a favorable outcome, such as the protein kinase LCK. Finally, based on these data we defined two protein signatures that clearly classify short-term and long-term relapse-free survivors. Conclusion: The ascites secretome points to metastasis-promoting events and an anti-tumor response as the major determinants of the clinical outcome of HGSC. Relevant proteins include both bone fide secreted and vesicle-encapsulated polypeptides, many of which have previously not been linked to HGSC recurrence. Besides a deeper understanding of the HGSC microenvironment our data provide novel potential tools for HGSC patient stratification. Furthermore, the first large-scale inter-platform validation of SOMAscan and PEA will be invaluable for other studies using these affinity proteomics platforms.

Extracellular vesicle measurements with nanoparticle tracking analysis - An accuracy and repeatability comparison between NanoSight NS300 and ZetaView.

The expanding field of extracellular vesicle (EV) research needs reproducible and accurate methods to characterize single EVs. Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis (NTA) is commonly used to determine EV concentration and diameter. As the EV field is lacking methods to easily confirm and validate NTA data, questioning the reliability of measurements remains highly important. In this regard, a comparison addressing measurement quality between different NTA devices such as Malvern's NanoSight NS300 or Particle Metrix' ZetaView has not yet been conducted. To evaluate the accuracy and repeatability of size and concentration determinations of both devices, we employed comparative methods including transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and single particle interferometric reflectance imaging sensing (SP-IRIS) by ExoView. Multiple test measurements with nanospheres, liposomes and ultracentrifuged EVs from human serum and cell culture supernatant were performed. Additionally, serial dilutions and freeze-thaw cycle-dependent EV decrease were measured to determine the robustness of each system. Strikingly, NanoSight NS300 exhibited a 2.0-2.1-fold overestimation of polystyrene and silica nanosphere concentration. By measuring serial dilutions of EV samples, we demonstrated higher accuracy in concentration determination by ZetaView (% BIAS range: 2.7-8.5) in comparison with NanoSight NS300 (% BIAS range: 32.9-36.8). The concentration measurements by ZetaView were also more precise (% CV range: 0.0-4.7) than measurements by NanoSight NS300 (% CV range: 5.4-10.7). On the contrary, quantitative TEM imaging indicated more accurate EV sizing by NanoSight NS300 (% DTEM range: 79.5-134.3) compared to ZetaView (% DTEM range: 111.8-205.7), while being equally repeatable (NanoSight NS300% CV range: 0.8-6.7; ZetaView: 1.4-7.8). However, both devices failed to report a peak EV diameter below 60 nm compared to TEM and SP-IRIS. Taken together, NTA devices differ strongly in their hardware and software affecting measuring results. ZetaView provided a more accurate and repeatable depiction of EV concentration, whereas NanoSight NS300 supplied size measurements of higher resolution.