Hemophilia Gene Therapy
and the Immune System
Welcome to Gene Therapy science / Immune Considerations for Hemophilia Gene Therapy
In order to protect itself against bacteria, viruses and other living or non-living substances that could appear foreign and harmful, the human body naturally elicits an immune response.1 Immune responses to gene therapy components may present obstacles for the potential long-term durability of hemophilia gene therapy.2
With gene therapy, both capsid components and the transgene may be seen as ‘foreign’ by the immune system, potentially triggering a cascade of cellular events that lead to an immune response.2 This immune response to the capsid can cause inefficient transduction of target cells by the vector (due to clearance of the vector before it reaches the target cell)3 and elimination of transduced cells.4,5 This may affect the number of transduced cells that possess the ability to express the gene of interest.4
Therefore, both pre-existing immunity to the capsid or an immune response to the gene therapy vector (capsid or transgene) can be important considerations for hemophilia gene therapy.2
The immune system is comprised of two temporally modulated responses:
• The innate immune response2,5• The adaptive immune response2,5
Innate immunity is responsible for recognizing and controlling infections during the initial hours and days after exposure to a new pathogen (rapid response).5,6 This response is not specific to a particular pathogen (antigen-independent), but rather acts as the body’s first line of defense against any invading pathogen, aiming to prevent its spread and movement throughout the body.2,6 The innate immune system has no immunologic memory and, therefore, does not specifically recognize reinfection with the same pathogen in the future.7
A number of non-specific inflammatory cells are involved in the innate immune response, including macrophages, natural killer cells and dendritic cells.8 These cells have the ability to recognize conserved molecular features of pathogens, allowing them to be rapidly activated.6 Many of the cells in the innate immune system produce cytokines or interact with other cells directly in order to activate the adaptive immune system.5,6
Activation of the innate immune system relies on pattern recognition receptors (PRRs), such as Toll-like receptors (TLRs), which allow innate immune cells to recognize foreign particles.5,8,9 PRRs recognize common structures on pathogens, termed pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs);5 for example lipopolysaccharides,7 microbial unmethylated cytosine-phosphate-guanosine (CpG) DNA sequences (recognized by TLR9),10 single-stranded RNA from viruses (recognized by TLR7 and 8),10 and double-stranded DNA produced during infection (recognized by TLR3).10 Activation of PRRs results in the stimulation of transcription factors that induce the expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines (e.g. tumor necrosis factor and interleukin), or the type I interferon cascade.2,5 Cytokines in turn initiate immune cell recruitment and induce inflammation, which are essential for the clearance of many pathogens.7 In parallel, TLR activation also triggers the induction of increased antigen-presenting capacity, therefore directing adaptive immune responses.9
Activation of the complement system is also an important component of the innate immune response. The complement system consists of a network of plasma and membrane bound proteins, and the activation of this pathway drives inflammatory and cytolytic responses to infectious organisms.11
The adaptive immune response is highly specific to the pathogen or foreign particle that has entered the body and provides long-lasting protection.1 Adaptive immune responses are carried out by lymphocytes and there are two broad classes of responses: humoral and cellular immunity.1
Both humoral and cellular immunity are key immunological considerations that exist within gene therapy.2,12
During the process of gene therapy, and in vivo administration of the gene-carrying vector to the patient, the ‘foreign’ nature of the vector (in current hemophilia gene therapy approaches this is recombinant adeno-associated virus [rAAV]) can elicit an immune response.2,13
In general, rAAVs have gained wide acceptance as gene therapy transfer vectors due to their mild pro-inflammatory profile.2 However, initial innate immune responses to rAAV, in addition to pre-existing immunity to AAV are possible.2
Interaction of the rAAV vector components (transgene and capsid) with the innate immune system have the potential to determine the efficacy of gene therapy.2 Studies show that the single-stranded DNA genome of rAAV can interact with the innate immune system via TLR9/MyD88 and type I interferon cascade, as well as triggering nuclear factor κB-dependent production of cytokine and chemokine release.2 Another study suggested that CpG enrichment in the transgene via codon optimization may elicit an innate immune response, possibly through TLR9, which results in loss of transgene expression over the short term.14
Following endocytosis, rAAV capsids can be degraded in endosomes, resulting in the transgene or capsid being exposed to PRRs such as TLR9 or TLR2, triggering an innate immune response.15 Further to this, the capsid of rAAV (specifically serotype 2) may interact with the innate immune system via TLR2.2 Although there is evidence that this immune recognition occurs, the implications of these interactions are not fully understood.2
During our lifetime, we can have natural exposure to wild-type AAV.16 AAV itself cannot replicate and cause an infection; it is dependent on co-infection with helper viruses to replicate (e.g. adenovirus or herpes simplex virus).2 This exposure to AAV results in the generation of memory B and T cells.2,13,16 Upon re-exposure to AAV, the innate immune responses are triggered by antigen-presenting cells, initiating the release of pro-inflammatory cytokines and the formation of neutralizing antibodies (nAbs) against various AAV serotypes,13,16 in addition to the expansion of a pool of pre-existing CD8+ memory T cells.16
The recombinant capsid of the rAAV vector is a close mimic of a viral capsid (although it is not a virus and is not capable of inducing synthesis of viral proteins).2 Immune responses to the vector can therefore be influenced by prior exposure to wild-type AAV from which the vector was engineered.2 This pre-existing immunity against AAV serotypes may inhibit rAAV transduction of target cells following administration of the vector, thereby impacting the efficiency and limiting the delivery of rAAV-based gene therapy.2
Further to this, there is a high amount of similarity in the amino acid sequence and structural homology across AAV capsids of some of the different AAV serotypes.2 Anti-AAV2 antibodies display the highest prevalence; however, anti-AAV antibodies show cross-reactivity over a wide range of serotypes.2,5 Rates of seroprevalence for various AAV serotypes can differ with age, type of AAV, geographical location, testing method and other factors.2,5,17
Pre-existing immunity against AAV may therefore impact the applicability of subsequent rounds of gene therapy with the same AAV, and at present, this suggests that re-administration of closely related AAV-derived vectors may not be successful due to AAV cross-reactivity.18
Immune responses against the administered vector can potentially impact the expected therapeutic effect of gene therapy1 with the following implications:
In order to optimize therapeutic efficacy of gene therapy, immunogenicity management strategies must consider both humoral and cellular immune responses. At present, many of these proposed strategies are theoretical or under investigation in clinical trials.
Current considerations for the management of humoral immune responses include:
Current considerations for the management of cellular immune responses include:
Related Content