Renee L Chin1,2, Jorge de la Cerda1, F William Schuler3, Sanhita Sinharay4, and Mark D Pagel1
1Cancer Systems Imaging, UT MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States, 2Immunology, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States, 3Cancer Systems Imaging, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, United States, 4Center for Biosystems Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore, India
Synopsis
Keywords: Cancer, CEST & MT, immunotherapy
Tumor
acidosis causes resistance to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) immunotherapy. We have identified a “pH-sensitizer” that increases the extracellular pH of the tumor
microenvironment, improving immunogenicity and tumor control with ICB. AcidoCEST MRI can measure the extracellular
pH of the tumor microenvironment. We
used acidoCEST MRI to correlate the increase in tumor pHe immediately caused by
the pH-senstizer with the tumor volume at study endpoint, in a pre-clinical
model of breast cancer. These results
show that acidoCEST MRI can contribute to predicting the outcome of
immunotherapy.
INTRODUCTION
Tumor
acidosis causes resistance to immune checkpoint blockade (ICB), primarily by
inhibiting T cell activation in the tumor microenvironment.1 Reducing tumor acidosis by inhibiting
mechanisms of extracellular acidification may improve the effect of immunotherapy.2 We refer to these inhibitors as “pH-sensitizers”. AcidoCEST MRI can longitudinally measure
extracellular pH (pHe) in the tumor microenvironment.3 Therefore, acidoCEST MRI may be able to
evaluate the early response to pH-sensitizers to ensure that the tumor has been
sufficiently sensitized before starting ICB treatment.MATERIALS and METHODS
To perform in
vitro studies, we screened a panel of small molecule inhibitors that
target 4T1 and tumor cell mechanisms that acidify the tumor microenvironment.
We used a Seahorse instrument to measure the proton efflux rate and extracellular
acidification rate. We also tested the
toxicity of each inhibitor against 4T1 tumor cells and T cells, and we
evaluated T cell inactivation after treatment with each inhibitor.
To perform in
vivo studies, we treated a 4T1 orthotopic tumor model with esomeprazole (a
VATPase inhibitor) and immune checkpoint blockade (anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1),
with 0, 1, and 3 days between treatment with the inhibitor vs. ICB. We also tested esomeprazole, ICB, and no
treatment as controls. We monitored
tumor volume and survival following treatment.
We also performed flow cytometry to characterize the T cell infiltration
and activation in tumors. In a separate in vivo study, we used acidoCEST
MRI to measure tumor pHe 1 day after administering esomeprazole to the 4T1
model.RESULTS
The in vitro
studies identified esomeprazole as the best inhibitor for raising tumor pHe,
while causing no significant toxicity to tumor cells or T cells, and without
inhibition of T cell activation (Figure 1).
The in vivo studies showed that esomeprazole followed one day later
with ICB significantly delayed tumor growth and increased survival, while
combinations with different timings did not significantly improve treatment
effect, and treatments with only esomeprazole or ICB also showed no significant
effect (Figure 2). The effective combination of esomeprazole followed 1 day by
ICB increased the intratumoral ratio of CD8+ T cell to Ly6C+ myeloid cells,
showing that esomeprazole enhanced T cell activity.
AcidoCEST MRI
measurements of tumor pHe 1 day after administering esomeprazole revealed a
range of increases in pHe among the tested tumors, indicating variability in
response to esomeprazole. This
variability in pHe response was an advantage in our study, because the mass of
4T1 tumors treated with esomeprazole and ICB negatively correlated with tumor
pHe measured 1 day of esomeprazole treatment.DISCUSSION
Our results
demonstrate that a single dose of esomeprazole can improve tumor control with
ICB. However, testing multiple doses of esomeprazole
is warranted, and other pH-sensitizers should also be tested, to optimize the
pH-sensitization prior to starting ICB treatment. Testing other tumor cell
types is especially warranted to investigate the robustness of this approach
for improving immunotherapy against many cancer types. Furthermore, the effect of esomeprazole on
tumor pHe measured 1 day after treatment was variable, suggesting that
acidoCEST MRI measurements of tumor pHe at earlier or later time points may be
needed to monitor the longitudinal effect of a pH-sensitizer. CONCLUSIONS
A pH-sensitizer can improve cancer
immunotherapy treatment as monitored with acidoCEST MRI.Acknowledgements
Our research is supported by the NIH/NCI
through grants R01 CA231513 and P30 CA016672.References
1. Gerweck LE, Seetharaman K. Cellular
pH gradient in tumor versus normal tissue: potential exploitation for the
treatment of cancer. Cancer Res 1996;56:1194-1198.
2. Pilon-Thomas S, et al.
Neutralization of Tumor Acidity Improves Antitumor Responses to Immunotherapy.
Cancer Res, 2016;76:1381-1390.
3. Chen LQ, et al. Evaluations of
extracellular pH within in vivo tumors using acidoCEST MRI. Magn Reson
Med, 2014;72:1408-1417.