Effect of synthetic agonists of toll-like receptor 9 on canine lymphocyte proliferation and cytokine production in vitro.

Synthetic agonists of TLR9 containing novel DNA structures and R'pG (wherein R=1-(2'-deoxy-beta-d-ribofuranosyl)-2-oxo-7-deaza-8-methyl-purine) motifs, referred to as immune modulatory oligonucleotides (IMOs), have been shown to stimulate T(H)-1-type-immune responses and potently reverse allergen-induced T(H)-2 responses to T(H)-1 responses in vitro and in vivo in mice. In order to investigate the immunomodulatory potential of IMOs in dogs, canine peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) from healthy dogs were stimulated with three different IMOs and a control IMO, alone or in combination with concanavalin A (ConA). Lipopolysaccharide (LPS) was used as a positive control for B lymphocyte activation. Carboxyfluorescein diacetate succinimidyl ester and phenotype staining was used to tag proliferating T and B lymphocytes (CD5(+) and CD21(+)) by flow cytometry. Real-time PCR and ELISA were processed to assay cytokine production of IFN-gamma, IL-10, TGF-beta, IL-6 and IL-10. Like LPS, IMOs alone induced neither proliferation of CD5(+) T cells nor CD21(+) B cells, but both LPS and IMO had the capacity to co-stimulate ConA and induced proliferation of B cells. In combination with ConA, one of the IMOs (IMO1) also induced proliferation of T cells. IMO1 also significantly enhanced the expression of IFN-gamma on the mRNA and protein level in canine PBMC, whereas expression of IL-10, TGF-beta and IL-4 mRNAs was not induced by any of the IMOs. These results indicate that in canine PBMC from healthy dogs, IMO1 was able to induce a T(H)-1 immune response including T- and B-cell proliferation.

Combined CA125 and mesothelin levels for the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: Malignant mesothelioma is an aggressive, uniformly fatal tumor. Serum markers would be useful for the diagnosis of this disease. One potential marker is mesothelin. The purpose of this study was to study the mesothelin biomarker in a large patient cohort and to determine if another biomarker, CA125, improves on the sensitivity of mesothelin in the diagnosis of mesothelioma. METHODS: Serum levels of mesothelin and CA125 were determined by commercially available assays in 117 samples obtained at diagnosis from patients with pleural malignant mesothelioma, 33 healthy, asbestos-exposed individuals, 53 patients with asbestos-related lung or pleural disease, and 30 patients presenting with benign pleural effusions. Cross-validated sensitivities were determined, and receiver operator characteristic curves were generated to compare the diagnostic accuracy of the biomarkers. RESULTS: CA125 had a cross-validated sensitivity of 27% for mesothelioma patients at a specificity of 95% relative to asbestos-exposed individuals, or 50% relative to individuals with benign pleural effusions. Mesothelin had a cross-validated sensitivity of 52% for mesothelioma patients, at a sensitivity of 95% relative to individuals with benign lung or pleural disease. CA125 and mesothelin levels were discordant in > 50% of mesothelioma patients. Combining the data from the two biomarkers using a logistic regression model did not improve sensitivity for detecting mesothelioma above that of the mesothelin marker alone. CONCLUSION: Combining mesothelin and CA125 data does not improve the sensitivity of mesothelioma diagnosis over mesothelin alone. The use of both markers potentially increases the number of patients who can be monitored.

Soluble mesothelin in effusions: a useful tool for the diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma is frequently difficult, the most common differential diagnosis being reactive pleural conditions and metastatic adenocarcinoma. Soluble mesothelin levels in serum have recently been shown to be highly specific and moderately sensitive for mesothelioma. As most patients with mesothelioma present with exudative effusions of either the pleura or the peritoneum, a study was undertaken to determine if levels of mesothelin were raised in these fluids and if the increased levels could help to distinguish mesothelioma from other causes of exudative effusion. METHODS: Pleural fluid was collected from 192 patients who presented to respiratory clinics (52 with malignant mesothelioma, 56 with non-mesotheliomatous malignancies and 84 with effusions of non-neoplastic origin). Peritoneal fluid was collected from 42 patients (7 with mesothelioma, 14 with non-mesotheliomatous malignancies and 21 with benign effusions). Mesothelin levels were determined in effusion and serum samples by ELISA. RESULTS: Significantly higher levels of mesothelin were found in effusions of patients with mesothelioma; with a specificity of 98%, the assay had a sensitivity of 67% comparing patients with mesothelioma and those with effusions of non-neoplastic origin. In 7 out of 10 cases mesothelin levels were raised in the effusion collected 3 weeks to 10 months before the diagnosis of mesothelioma was made; in 4 out of 8 of these, mesothelin levels were increased in the effusion but not in the serum. CONCLUSIONS: Measurement of mesothelin concentrations in the pleural and/or peritoneal effusion of patients may aid in the differential diagnosis of mesothelioma in patients presenting with effusions.