Skip to main content

A Quest for the Holy Grail of Cancer Targets

Christopher Klebanoff hopes that his search for a small fraction of cancer-specific antigens will have a big impact on cancer cell therapies.

Written byDanielle Gerhard, PhD
| 5 min read
3D illustration of a lymphocyte in white and green.
Register for free to listen to this article
Listen with Speechify
0:00
5:00

In the early 2010s, three different groups, including a team at the National Cancer Institute (NCI), contemporaneously reported that chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy produced durable responses in patients with B cell cancers for the first time.1 Christopher Klebanoff, a cellular therapist and oncologist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, was doing a fellowship at the NCI when this watershed moment for the field of cell therapy occurred. These formative years in his training as a clinician scientist bolstered his interest in genetic engineering applications for studying T cell immunobiology.

Photo of Christopher Klebanoff
Christopher Klebanoff, an oncologist and cellular therapist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, studies the therapeutic potential of engineered T cell immunotherapies for solid cancers.
MSK Media Services

Although the FDA has approved six CAR T cell therapies for liquid cancers, these therapies have struggled to make a breakthrough for solid tumors. One limitation of current CAR T cells is that they fail to discriminate between healthy and cancerous cells, depleting B cells in their wake. While clinicians can manage patients that lack circulating B cells, deploying the same widespread killing tactic is risky when treating cancers that mingle with organs. Additionally, the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment, tumor heterogeneity, and antigen escape further limit CAR efficacy. Parallel to research exploring CAR system upgrades, some scientists have turned their attention to the potential of T cell receptor (TCR) therapies.2 Klebanoff, who studies adoptive T cell immunotherapies for treating solid cancers, discussed why the TCR is uniquely qualified to target tumor specific antigens, including neoantigens, and highlighted emerging cancer therapeutics that exploit TCR’s capacity to track and kill faulty cells.3

Continue reading below...

Like this story? Sign up for FREE Immunology updates:

Latest science news storiesTopic-tailored resources and eventsCustomized newsletter content
Subscribe

How can TCR-based therapeutics address the current limitations of treating solid tumors?

The TCR increases the number and types of proteins available to surveilling T cells. Unlike a CAR, which only detects antigens expressed on the surface of a cell, a TCR can also access the intracellular cancer proteome. This is the result of an elegant evolutionary process that equipped T cells with a sophisticated surveillance system: the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) presentation pathway. When the proteasome breaks down proteins inside a nucleated cell, including mutated proteins and those derived from pathogens, it produces short peptides. HLA molecules scoop these up and shuttle them to the cell’s surface for surveilling T cells to sample in search of foreign invaders.

A TCR can detect tiny amounts of these molecules; some researchers have found that as few as one to three peptides per cell can activate a TCR.4 For comparison, CAR T cells require thousands of copies of an antigen. As a result, even a subtle downregulation in the absolute amount of a target molecule, as seen with antigen escape, is enough to confer resistance to the therapy.

Diversity in the variable binding domains of the TCR’s alpha and beta chains facilitates detection of different HLA-peptide complexes. Scientists are taking a few different approaches to leverage the TCR’s elegant recognition system, including engineering the variable regions of the TCR and developing recombinant bispecific proteins that bind to specific HLA-peptide complexes.

What are the challenges in designing a TCR-based therapeutic?

The major bottleneck is finding targets that are uniquely and homogeneously expressed by cancer cells. Another challenge is that TCR therapeutics must be specific for the target antigen and also compatible with the HLA type of an individual. This is nontrivial because humans express diverse HLA types, which are akin to blood types, but rather than four different possibilities, there are tens of thousands of HLA molecules. Luckily, some HLA types are more common than others.5

This can complicate identifying patients who might benefit from a particular therapy because we need to confirm that the patient's cancer expresses the target antigen and that it is presented by a compatible HLA type. There will never be one TCR for all patients, but the goal is to create a library of vetted TCR that have the perfect mixture of potency, specificity, and compatibility so that we can accommodate as many patients as possible.

What makes a good TCR target?

The perfect intracellular TCR target is one that is homogeneously and uniquely expressed throughout the cancer cells and is shared among groups of patients. This avoids the need to develop expensive and bespoke one-off therapies. Additionally, it's a target that the cancer cell would find difficult to downregulate or lose if it's trying to escape detection from a targeted therapy. The focus of my lab is to search for these holy grail TCR targets.

A majority of tumor antigens are private neoantigens, or patient-specific targets that result from mutations that don’t affect cancer cell fitness and therefore are susceptible to antigen escape.6 Although a much smaller population, public neoantigens are shared by more than one patient and are essential for cancer cell survival, making them good targets for neoantigen-directed therapies.7 We’ve coalesced around peptides, or epitopes, that are derived from recurrent hotspot mutations in driver genes. Driver oncogenes are recurrently mutated genes—like Kirsten rat sarcoma virus (KRAS) and tumor protein p53—that drive cancer cell phenotypes, so a cancer cell would find it very difficult to lose expression of a driver gene and still grow, divide, and metastasize in an uncontrolled fashion.

We developed a strategy to look for recurrent driver mutations that are also bound and presented by common HLA types.7 By using this information, we can engineer a TCR to recognize these public neoantigens.

Why have TCR-based therapeutics taken so much longer than CAR therapies to enter oncology?

Using current technologies, it’s difficult to discover new TCR with a diverse binding profile or refine a TCR using current technologies. In contrast, monoclonal antibodies are the starting material for finding a binder for a CAR so the field really benefits from decades of research that streamlines the discovery of monoclonal antibodies that recognize specific targets, like phage display. Currently there isn’t a technology that similarly streamlines TCR discovery, but there are some really cool emerging technologies in the pipeline.

Thirty years ago, different groups of researchers came up with this brilliant idea that if they took a mouse and replaced its immunoglobulin locus—the genetic locus that makes antibodies—with the human sequence, they could generate humanized immunoglobulin mice that produced human antibodies.8 Since then, a couple of groups have used this same approach but for the TCR loci.9,10 The hope is that they can efficiently immunize the transgenic mouse against a specific human antigen in order to generate a diverse set of human TCR that are specific for that antigen.11

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Add The Scientist as a preferred source on Google

Add The Scientist as a preferred Google source to see more of our trusted coverage.

Meet the Author

  • Black and white photo of Danielle Gerhard

    Danielle is a Senior Editor at The Scientist. She earned her PhD in psychology and behavioral neuroscience from Yale University and completed a postdoctoral fellowship in neuroscience Weill Cornell Medicine. Her research explored the cellular and molecular mechanisms of stress and depression across development. She has served as editor-in-chief of the Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, contributed stories to BioTechniques News and Drug Discovery News, and engaged in various science outreach initiatives across Connecticut and NYC.

    View Full Profile

Related Topics

You might also be interested in...
Loading Next Article...
You might also be interested in...
Loading Next Article...
August 2026 Digest cover
August 2026

Epic Fail: Sea-Monkeys Sabotage Fieldwork

When Barry Hicks set out to photograph thrombolites, thousands of unexpected visitors photobombed his underwater images.

View this Issue
Overcoming Immunotherapy Resistance in Liver Cancer

Overcoming Immunotherapy Resistance in Liver Cancer

Axion Biosystems
Optimizing NGS Library Preparation for Reliable Sequencing Data

Optimizing NGS Library Preparation for Reliable Sequencing Data

Covaris
Using TCR Repertoire Sequencing to Advance Immunology Research

Using TCR Repertoire Sequencing to Advance Immunology Research

Miltenyi
Mapping Clonal Mosaicism in Aging Tissues

Mapping Clonal Mosaicism in Aging Tissues

Mission bio

Products

Sino Biological Logo

Sino Biological Launches SuperNuclease ® Pro with Free Trial Program

Sino Biological Logo

Sino Biological Launches Precisely Characterized Full-Length p-Tau217 Protein to Advance Next-Generation Alzheimer’s Biomarker Assay Development

A photo of a scientist placing the Resipher device on a 96-well plate.

Resipher: Continuous Live-Cell Mitochondrial Respiration Monitoring in 96-Well Plates

Lucid Scientific logo
Conceptual image of ice and frost.

The VAULT100 PRO: Inside the most advanced Stirling Ultracold ULT freezer ever built.

Stirling Ultracold logo