Abstract
L1210 leukemia cells were treated in vitro with 1,3-bis(2-chloroethyl)-1-nitrosourea (BCNU) and reovirus to determine their interactive effects on rejection of these tumor cells by mice. The cells were treated with BCNU at concentrations of 0, 3, or 10 μM, incubated for 48 h, then treated with reovirus at a multiplicity of infection of 0, 10, 30, or 100 for 2, 6, or 12 h. The survival of mice injected with cells treated with any amount of reovirus, regardless of BCNU treatment, was greater than that of mice injected with untreated cells. Exposure of the cells to reovirus for 6 or 12 h increased the survival of mice injected with these cells as compared with that of mice injected with cells exposed to reovirus for 2 h. Of the survivors, 76% were resistant to subsequent challenge with untreated L1210 cells. These results suggest that activities associated with reovirus replication may cause modifications of L1210 cells that enable them to induce an immune response, thus facilitating their rejection. A lack of correlation between differences in DNA synthesis (measured by 3H-thymidine uptake) by treated cells and the ability of those cells to kill recipient mice indicates that rejection of cells treated with reovirus or BCNU is not due to a decrease in their ability to proliferate or, presumably, to generate lethal tumors. The survival of mice injected with treated L1210 cell preparations containing as few as 2.9% reovirus-infected cells was enhanced to the same degree as that of mice injected with those containing as many as 14.6% infected cells, indicating that modification of only a minor component of the tumor cell population is sufficient to alter the ability of the cells to generate a lethal tumor.
Keywords: Infected Cell, Untreated Cell, Minor Component, L1210 Cell, Cell Preparation
Footnotes
This work was supported by a research grant from the Miami University Faculty Research Committee and a Sigma Xi Grant-in-Aid of Research
References
- 1.Alexander P, Evans R. Endotoxin and double stranded RNA render macrophages cytotoxic. Nature. 1971;232:76. doi: 10.1038/newbio232076a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Duncan MR, Stanish SM, Cox DC. Differential sensitivity of normal and transformed human cells to reovirus infection. J Virol. 1978;28:444. doi: 10.1128/jvi.28.2.444-449.1978. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Epstein RL, Finberg R, Powers ML, Weiner HL. Interaction of reovirus with cell surface receptors: IV. The reovirus type 3 receptor is expressed predominantly on murine Lyt-2,3+ and human T8+ cells. J Immunol. 1984;133:1614. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Erickson LC, Bradley MO, Ducore JM, Ewig AG, Kohn KW. DNA crosslinking and cytotoxicity in normal and transformed human cells treated with antitumor nitrosoureas. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1980;77:467. doi: 10.1073/pnas.77.1.467. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Herberman RB, Djeu JY, Kay HD, Ortaldo JR, Riccardi C, Bonnard GD, Holden HT, Fagnani R, Santoni A, Puccetti P. Natural killer cells: characteristics and regulation of activity. Immunol Rev. 1979;44:43. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-065x.1979.tb00267.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Hibbs JB, Lambert LH, Remington JS. Possible role of macrophage-mediated nonspecific cytotoxicity in tumor resistance. Nature. 1972;235:48. doi: 10.1038/newbio235048a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Hull CH, Nie N. SPSSX Users Guide. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.; 1983. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Kann HE. Comparison of biochemical and biological effects of four nitrosoureas with differing carbamoylating activities. Cancer Res. 1978;38:2363. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Kasai M, Yamguchi H, Hosokawa M, Mizushima Y, Kobayashi H. Increased sensitivity of murine leukemia virusinfected tumor cells to lymphocyte-mediated cytotoxicity. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1981;67:417. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Kobayashi H, Sendo F, Shirai T, Kaji H, Kodama T. Modification in growth of transplantable rat tumors exposed to Friend virus. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1969;42:413. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Kollmorgen GM, Cox DC, Killion JJ, Cantrell JL, Sansing WA. Immunotherapy of EL-4 lymphoma with reovirus. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 1976;1:239. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Kollmorgen GM, Sansing WA, Cox DC, Killion JJ, Cantrell JL. Induction of immunity with immunotherapy. In: Crespan RG, editor. Neoplasm immunity: mechanisms. Chicago: ITR Press; 1976. pp. 25–38. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Lai MHT, Joklik WK. The induction of interferon by temperature mutants of reovirus UV-irradiated reovirus, and subviral reovirus particles. Virology. 1973;51:191. doi: 10.1016/0042-6822(73)90379-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Mishell BB, Shiigi SM. Selected methods in cellular immunology. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Company; 1980. p. 23. [Google Scholar]
- 15.Nagarkatti M, Kaplan AM. The role of suppressor T cells in BCNU-mediated rejection of a syngeneic tumor. J Immunol. 1985;135:1510. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Rosner BA. Fundamentals of biostatistics. Boston: Duxbury Press; 1982. pp. 410–447. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Shaw JE, Cox DC. Early inhibition of cellular DNA synthesis by high multiplicities of infectious and UV-inactivated reovirus. J Virol. 1973;12:704. doi: 10.1128/jvi.12.4.704-710.1973. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Tong WP, Ludlum DB. Formation of the cross-linked base, diguanylethane in DNA treated with N,N'-bis(2-chloroethyl)-1-nitrosurea. Cancer Res. 1981;41:380. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Yamaguchi H, Moriuchi T, Hosokawa M, Kobayashi H. Increased or decreased immunogenicity of tumor-associated antigen according to the amount of virus-associated antigen in rat tumor cells infected with Friend virus. Cancer Immunol Immunother. 1982;12:119. [Google Scholar]