Flanagan
et al. Laminin-411 Is a Vascular Ligand for MCAM and Facilitates TH17 Cell Entry into the CNS. . PLoS One. 2012;7(7):e40443.
TH17 cells enter tissues to facilitate pathogenic autoimmune responses, including multiple sclerosis
(MS). However, the adhesion molecules involved in the unique migratory
capacity of TH17 cells, into both inflamed and uninflamed tissues remain
unclear. Herein, we characterize MCAM (CD146) as an adhesion molecule
that defines human TH17 cells in the circulation; following in vitro
restimulation of human memory T cells, nearly all of the capacity to
secrete IL-17 is contained within the population of cells expressing
MCAM. Furthermore, we identify the MCAM ligand as laminin 411, an
isoform of laminin expressed within the vascular endothelial basement
membranes under inflammatory as well as homeotstatic conditions.
Purified MCAM-Fc binds to laminin 411 with an affinity of 27 nM, and
recognizes vascular basement membranes in mouse and human tissue.
MCAM-Fc binding was undetectable in tissue from mice with targeted
deletion of laminin 411, indicating that laminin 411 is a major tissue
ligand for MCAM. An anti-MCAM monoclonal antibody, selected for
inhibition of laminin binding, as well as soluble MCAM-Fc, inhibited T
cell adhesion to laminin 411 in vitro. When administered in vivo, the
antibody reduced TH17 cell infiltration into the CNS and ameliorated
disease in an animal model of MS. Our data suggest that MCAM and laminin
411 interact to facilitate TH17 cell entry into tissues and promote
inflammation.
As you know Th17 T cells are thought to be the cell type that drives autoimmunity and so inhibiting their function would be beneficial for MS. This work suggests that TH17 cells use melanoma cell adhesion molecule (MCAM). This adhesion molecules are found on T cells but also on some blood vessels, but not in the brain.
Laminins are proteins in the membranes around cells such as blood vessels. Laminin-411 (laminin-8) is expressed in endothelial cells, adipocytes,
lymphocytes and platelets, and muscle cells as well as
pancreatic cells, salivary and gastric glands, and epidermal
cells in the developing and adult human bod. One of the main isoform of laminins in capillaries and larger vessels
produced by endothelial cells is Laminin-411 and, thus, their role in
endothelial basal laminae function is thought to be pivotal. Laminin-411 is secreted by lymphocytes and supports their proliferation. It is also involved in the migration of lymphocytes and neutrophils bone
marrow stem cells and tumours. In this study they showed that TH17 cells produce MCAM and then found that this bound to Laminin-411.
Ted Yednock was the main inventor of the drug that became Tysabri. They did the same type of experiments that lead to that drug but in this case they made a blocker of the MCAM-laminin-411 interaction and gave it to EAE at onset. In contrast to what the abstract said that "the
antibody reduced Th17 cell infiltration into the CNS and ameliorated
disease in an animal model of MS" it did nothing.
A drug that stops recruitment of cells into the CNS after onset can rapidly stop the accumulation of clinical disease within a day or so. I suspect the results were so disappointing that they have stopped development of this, because dogma is EAE is caused by Th17 cells and so blocking these cells would block EAE.
A drug that stops recruitment of cells into the CNS after onset can rapidly stop the accumulation of clinical disease within a day or so. I suspect the results were so disappointing that they have stopped development of this, because dogma is EAE is caused by Th17 cells and so blocking these cells would block EAE.
However, if you have been following my recent reports both YOU and I know that Th17 cells don't do much in the first phase of EAE. So they got the result (see above) you should get in that it did not work! It stopped the animals from relapsing, which is what it should do it if it stopped TH17 cells getting in to the CNS.
This may have been the next tysabri and may have less risk of causing PML as it does not affect all of the T cell population. But is it binned forever?
Should we write to them to find out?
If Th17 cells are so important and use laminin-411 and MCAM (CD146), what is Tysabri doing? as this blocks the CD49d and VCAM-1 (CD106).
CoI: None


It has been said several times, that rodent models for MS are not too reliable (at least 50% of the drugs that worked for mice did not work for humans afterwards on phase II trials). Tysabri is the most efficient drug to date for delaying the illness. Why should not be approached the other way for once? (Trying the drug for humans even if it did not fully work for mice)
ReplyDeleteTysabri is the most effective drug to date that is licenced and came from animal studies. Once if Lemtrada gets licenced it will be up their in the efficacy state. Anti-CD52 works in animals also. Gilenya works in mice also
ReplyDeleteThere are 50% of studies that did not work. Fair point.
As I have been saying for years over 70% of studies in mice give the drug before the signs of disease. Less than 1% give the drug after first disease attack. Do this after even the first attack and the drugs may not work.
Use the dose of drug that is used in humans and the drug may not work as many of the studies in rodents the drug dose used to justify the drug is very high
If you read my posts we can also lay blame with the clinical trials as they were not fit for purpose and the drug was doomed before it was started. See my post a few days ago using the cannabis trials as an example. Using immunosupppressive drugs in non-responsive progressive MSers when they should have gone early MSers
EAE is not MS.
"Why not try them in humans when they don't fully work for mice".
What is the fate of this programme will they plough on? Drop it? Not bother with MS, do the more informative experiments? These are company descisions that I do not know the answer only time will tell
Sometimes the companies will, but it is part of the risk profile. If your drug targets a mechanism and the mechanisms is active in mice and your drug does not work, it is riskier if you then try and target the same mechanism. Furthermore the FDA like to see basic science data supporting the clinical studies.
If you look at the animal data tysabri homologues were not that great in rodent EAE, until they tried it in the guinea pig. Now you have a block buster
Thanks for your answer, MouseDoctor. I greatly appreciate your off-Pharma industry view (even if we depend on them to advance on stopping the illness).
ReplyDeleteMy point goes even beyond my previous post: 1) Why do clinical trials have to wait until the new drug proves useful on an animal model (already answered by you), and 2) Why are clinical trials targeted at evaluating only efficacy of one treatment?
On some cases we can see that a combination of 2 treatments (see for example clinical trial for Rebif + Curcumin) are being evaluated, but only if one of them has already been proved to be effective. I work as a Design engineer, and we are continuously using DoE's in order to solve problems. Couldn't this be done by MS?
Couldn't this be done by MS?
ReplyDeleteI wish