BACKGROUND Approximately 5% of advanced stage breast cancer (BC) will develop leptomeningeal disease (LMD), a rare form of metastasis in the meninges. The prognosis for LMD is dismal and current treatments are ineffective. Here, we found intrathecal (IT) delivery of MHC class II peptide-pulsed conventional Type 1 dendritic cells (cDC1s) could cure mice harbouring either HER2+ or triple negative breast cancer (TBNC) LMD. The data from our preclinical studies led to a Phase 1 clinical trial of cDC1s in HER2+ and TNBC LMD (NCT05809752; in progress). METHODS We created a “murine Ommaya” that mimics the clinically used Ommaya reservoir and allows for repeated IT injections of novel drugs at 3 – 7ml volume directly into the cerebral spinal fluid (CSF). A pipeline was developed for screening immunogenic MHC class II peptides from tumor-associated oncodrivers and using these targets we generated tumor-targeting cDC1 vaccine. We tested the efficacy of this therapy in murine BC-LMD by administering through the murine Ommaya. RESULTS We found cDC1 vaccine was highly effective against HER2+ LMD and TNBC-LMD; LMD mice that received IT cDC1s had reduced tumour burden and prolonged survival. Complete responses to treatment ranged between 30 - 70% in HER2+ LMD and TNBC-LMD and were CD4+ T cell and B cell dependent. Notably, some cured mice were protected against LMD reinoculation. Subsequent single cell RNA-sequencing analyses of pre- and post-treatment CSF revealed an adaptive change in the immune cellular landscape. We noted an elevation of Th1 proinflammatory cytokines such as IFN-g in the CSF. This was recapitulated in the CSF samples of patients enrolled in an on-going phase 1 trial, where early data showed IT cDC1 vaccine triggered a dramatic increase in the concentration of several proinflammatory Th1 cytokines. CONCLUSIONS IT cDC1 vaccine is effective against BC-LMD and prevents LMD recurrence. A future approach includes testing IT cDC1 platform in LMD from other cancers (e.g. melanoma etc.).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Law et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: