Journal: Frontiers in Immunology
Article Title: IFNγ-induced antigen loss in chimeric antigen receptor-T cell therapy
doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2026.1772472
Figure Lengend Snippet: CART-induced GUCY2C loss is mediated by the IFNγ-JAK-STAT1 signaling axis. (A) LS174T cells and orthogonal approaches of cytokine screening (B) and confirmation (C) , IFNγ neutralizing antibody (D) , pharmacologic JAK1/2 blockade with ruxolitinib (E) , and JAK1/2 genetic knockout (F) were used to define the role of the IFNγ-JAK-STAT signaling axis in GUCY2C loss. (B) LS174T cells were treated with GM-CSF (20 ng/mL), TNFα (1 ng/mL), IL-8 (2 ng/mL), MIP-1α (2 ng/mL), MIP-1β (2 ng/mL), or IFNγ (15 ng/mL) for 48 hours, and GUCY2C protein levels were quantified. (C) LS174T cells were treated with 150 ng/mL IFNγ for 48 hours, and pSTAT1 and GUCY2C protein levels were quantified. (D–F) LS174T cells were treated with conditioned media (CM) for 48 hours from control or anti-CD3/CD2/CD28 bead-activated T cells, and pSTAT1 and GUCY2C protein levels were quantified; (D) 13 μg/mL anti-IFNγ neutralizing antibody was included in some conditions; (E) 2.5 μM ruxolitinib was included in some conditions; (F) LS174T cell pools previously treated with control CRISPR/Cas9 or JAK1 + 2 CRISPR/Cas9 were used. Each data point in (B–F) represents average of biological replicates from separate experiments (N = 3–4 experiments). In (C–F) , pSTAT, GUCY2C, and housekeeping control were examined on the same blot. The housekeeping protein is shown only below GUCY2C. A paired t-test was used to compare the two conditions in (C) ; in (B) and (D–F) , one-way ANOVA was used to compare each condition to the control treatment, and additional comparisons are indicated by bars; ns = p > 0.05, * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, **** p < 0.0001. Figure schematics were generated using BioRender.com .
Article Snippet: LS174T (CL-188, ATCC), SKCO1 (HTB-39), LoVo (CCL229, ATCC), and T84 (CCL-248, ATCC) were obtained ATCC.
Techniques: Knock-Out, Control, CRISPR, Generated