Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Dramatically Wiped Out by Reprogrammed Cells

Patchwork receptors target immune cells against cancer.

By Heidi Ledford of Nature magazine

Two weeks after receiving an experimental treatment for his cancer, David Porter's 65-year-old leukemia patient seemed to take a turn for the worse. Fatigue and fever drove the patient back to hospital, where his temperature surged to more than 39º C and he began to shake, his body racked with nausea and diarrhea.

But rather than being a clinical failure, the patient's return to hospital heralded the treatment's success. His symptoms were the dying scream of more than a kilogram of leukemia cells under attack by genetically engineered immune cells called T cells that Porter, an oncologist at the University of Pennsylvania Medical Center in Philadelphia, and his colleagues had infused two weeks earlier. As the T cells destroyed their targets, the sheer volume of cellular debris temporarily overwhelmed the patient's body.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


"I was sure the war was on," the patient, who has asked to remain anonymous, wrote in a statement released to reporters. "It was another week later that I got the news that my bone marrow was completely free of detectable disease."The dramatic results from this patient and two others, published this week in the New England Journal of Medicine and Science Translational Medicine, are among the first successes for a long-sought therapy based on reprogramming immune cells to attack cancers.

The approach aims to harness the lethal capabilities of T cells. Porter and his colleagues, including immunologist Carl June, engineered each patient's T cells to recognize a protein called CD19 that is displayed on the surface of cancerous cells as well as on normal immune cells called B cells.

Researchers have long sought to kill cancer with T cells containing such "chimeric antigen receptors", but early results were disappointing. Then, last year, the field was rocked by the reports of two deaths in clinical trials of similar therapies.

Advocates of the technique hope that Porter's results and others like them will spark a renaissance. "These are very encouraging findings," says Michel Sadelain, a cancer researcher at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York. "It really vindicates this small but growing field of cancer researchers who believe that cells are very smart drugs."

Promising leads

Cells may be smart, but researchers have struggled to harness that intelligence to fight cancer. Early attempts to engineer T cells with chimeric antigen receptors failed to coax the cells to proliferate in the body. As a result, the modified cells soon died off, leaving little impact on the disease.

Porter's group is one the first to report results from a generation of chimeric receptors that include both an antibody to target the cancer and part of a receptor that amplifies the T-cell response. This time, the doctored T cells proliferated more than 1,000-fold in the body, and were still present at high levels six months after the treatment.

June credits this expansion and persistence for the study's dramatic results: two patients in complete remission and a third showing a partial response. The treatment kills off normal antibody-producing B cells too, but patients can be given regular infusions of antibodies to compensate for this, Porter says.

Other laboratories have also reported success with this generation of receptors. Last year, Steven Rosenberg's group at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) in Bethesda, Maryland, published a similarly promising case report: a person with lymphoma given T cells modified to target CD19 experienced a partial remission of his cancer. That patient, treated initially in 2009, received a second treatment in March 2010 and is "still having a fabulous response", says Rosenberg.

Safety first

Rosenberg's team has since treated six more patients with lymphoma or leukemia, and the NCI plans to sponsor chimeric antigen receptor trials against pancreatic cancer, brain tumours called glioblastomas and a rare lung cancer called mesothelioma.

Meanwhile, results from Sadelain's trial of CD19-targeting T cells in nine patients are due to be published soon, and Robert Hawkins, a cancer researcher at the University of Manchester, UK, says that his team is in the midst of a CD19 trial that is showing "encouraging" results.

All these trials are small, and the results, although promising, are preliminary. That means the field still needs to come to grips with the potential toxicity of such treatments, cautions Walter Urba, an oncologist at the Providence Cancer Center in Portland, Oregon.

In the wake of the case reports describing the deaths of the two clinical trial participants last year3,4, some trials were put on hold, and the US Food and Drug Administration convened a meeting to discuss the need for added safety measures.

"That really set the field back," says John Maher, a clinical immunologist at King's College London. "But the recent results are great news."

As for Porter's patient; he is still marvelling over his experience. "When I was a young scientist, like many I'm sure, I dreamed that I might make a discovery that would make a difference to mankind," he wrote. "I never imagined I would be part of the experiment."

This article is reproduced with permission from the magazine Nature. The article was first published on August 10, 2011.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe