Research Advances in Fusion Protein-Based Drugs for Diabetes Treatment

✅ 全文

基于融合蛋白的糖尿病治疗药物研究进展

作者 Wen-Ying Deng; Zhanhong Zhao; Tao Zou; Tong-Dong Kuang; Jing Wang 期刊 Diabetes Metabolic Syndrome and Obesity 发表日期 2024 ISSN 1178-7007 DOI 10.2147/dmso.s421527 类型 原创研究 (Original Research)

📄 英文摘要 English Abstract

EN

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic metabolic disease characterized by elevated blood glucose levels, resulting in multi-organ dysfunction and various complications. Fusion proteins can form multifunctional complexes by combining the target proteins with partner proteins. It has significant advantages in improving the performance of the target proteins, extending their biological half-life, and enhancing patient drug compliance. Fusion protein-based drugs have emerged as promising new drugs in diabetes therapeutics. However, there has not been a systematic review of fusion protein-based drugs for diabetes therapeutics. Hence, we conducted a comprehensive review of published literature on diabetic fusion protein-based drugs for diabetes, with a primary focus on immunoglobulin G (IgG) fragment crystallizable (Fc) region, albumin, and transferrin (TF). This review aims to provide a reference for the subsequent development and clinical application of fusion protein-based drugs in diabetes therapeutics.

📄 中文摘要 Chinese Abstract

中文
免疫球蛋白M(IgM)抗体作为癌症免疫治疗的新一代平台正重新受到关注。与IgG相比,IgM具有独特的生物学优势,包括多价结合带来的更高亲和力、强效的补体激活能力,以及在免疫抑制微环境中对异质性肿瘤抗原的增强识别能力。这些特性使IgM成为实体瘤治疗的有前景的候选药物,尽管目前尚无获批的IgM类治疗药物。IgG疗法面临若干局限性,包括因其双价性导致的对低密度或弱亲和力抗原的低亲和力、向实体瘤的渗透受限,以及强效补体介导的裂解能力有限,这些局限激发了人们对其他同种型(尤其是IgM)的兴趣。

📋 英文结构化总结 English Structured Summary

全文整理

EN

Header:

Background Immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies are gaining renewed attention as next-generation platforms for cancer immunotherapy. Compared with IgG, IgM exhibits distinct biological advantages, including higher avidity from multivalent binding, potent complement activation, and enhanced recognition of heterogeneous tumor antigens within immunosuppressive microenvironments. These attributes position IgM as a promising candidate for solid tumor therapy, despite the absence of currently approved IgM-based therapeutics. IgG therapies face several limitations, including low avidity for antigens with low density or weak affinity as a result of their bivalency, restricted penetration into solid tumors, and a limited capacity for potent complement-mediated lysis, which have stimulated interest in alternative isotypes, particularly IgM.

Header:

Methods N/A - Review article

Header:

Results Recent advances in genetic engineering, antibody design, and protein manufacturing have enabled the generation of diverse IgM formats—ranging from monoclonal and bispecific constructs to engineered IgM derivatives—demonstrating substantial antitumor potential in preclinical and early translational studies. IgM possesses ten binding sites, conferring higher binding avidity than IgG antibodies targeting the same epitope, enabling effective binding to low-density or weakly expressed tumor-associated antigens. Its pentameric architecture further promotes potent complement activation and direct lysis of tumor cells.

Header:

Data Summary IgM exists as a monomer on B-cell surface but polymerizes into either a J chain–containing pentamer or a J chain–independent hexamer, with the pentameric form predominating in humans. The IgM light chain comprises ~220 amino acids, whereas the heavy chain consists of ~576 amino acids. The C-terminus of IgM heavy chain contains tailpieces comprising an 18-amino-acid peptide sequence.

Header:

Conclusions These functional advantages underscore the potential of developing novel antibody therapies based on IgM. Together, these insights underscore the therapeutic promise of IgM and chart a path toward its integration into the next generation of antibody-based cancer immunotherapies.

Header:

Practical Significance IgM antibodies are a promising candidate for solid tumor therapy, with recent advances enabling diverse formats that show antitumor potential in preclinical and early translational studies. Although no IgM-based therapeutics are currently approved, the distinct biological advantages of IgM—such as high avidity and potent complement activation—offer real-world applications in overcoming the limitations of IgG-based therapies for solid tumors.

📋 中文结构化总结 Chinese Structured Summary

中文

背景:

免疫球蛋白M(IgM)抗体作为癌症免疫治疗的新一代平台正重新受到关注。与IgG相比,IgM具有独特的生物学优势,包括多价结合带来的更高亲和力、强效的补体激活能力,以及在免疫抑制微环境中对异质性肿瘤抗原的增强识别能力。这些特性使IgM成为实体瘤治疗的有前景的候选药物,尽管目前尚无获批的IgM类治疗药物。IgG疗法面临若干局限性,包括因其双价性导致的对低密度或弱亲和力抗原的低亲和力、向实体瘤的渗透受限,以及强效补体介导的裂解能力有限,这些局限激发了人们对其他同种型(尤其是IgM)的兴趣。

方法:

不适用 - 综述文章

结果:

基因工程、抗体设计和蛋白质制造方面的最新进展使得能够生成多种IgM格式——从单克隆和双特异性构建物到工程化IgM衍生物——在临床前和早期转化研究中展现出显著的抗肿瘤潜力。IgM具有十个结合位点,赋予其比靶向相同表位的IgG抗体更高的结合亲和力,使其能够有效结合低密度或弱表达的肿瘤相关抗原。其五聚体结构进一步促进强效的补体激活和肿瘤细胞的直接裂解。

数据摘要:

IgM以单体形式存在于B细胞表面,但可聚合为含J链的五聚体或不含J链的六聚体,其中五聚体形式在人体中占主导地位。IgM轻链包含约220个氨基酸,而重链由约576个氨基酸组成。IgM重链的C端包含由18个氨基酸肽序列组成的尾段。

结论:

这些功能优势强调了基于IgM开发新型抗体疗法的潜力。这些见解共同凸显了IgM的治疗前景,并为其融入下一代基于抗体的癌症免疫疗法指明了方向。

实际意义:

IgM抗体是实体瘤治疗的有前景的候选药物,最近的进展使得多种格式在临床前和早期转化研究中显示出抗肿瘤潜力。尽管目前尚无获批的IgM类治疗药物,但IgM独特的生物学优势——如高亲和力和强效补体激活——为克服IgG类疗法在实体瘤治疗中的局限性提供了实际应用价值。

📖 英文全文 English Full Text

EN

TYPE Mini Review PUBLISHED 05 November 2025 DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1712344 OPEN ACCESS EDITED BY Yuanzhi Chen, Xiamen University, China REVIEWED BY

Akram N. Salah, Ain Shams University Faculty of Pharmacy Microbiology and Immunology, Egypt Hui Sun, Tianfu Jincheng Laboratory, China Chaolong Lin, Xiamen University, China *CORRESPONDENCE

Peng Sun psun1@qdu.edu.cn Xinlin Liu huazhonglxl@163.com Wenjing Zhu zhuwj@uor.edu.cn † These authors have contributed equally to this work RECEIVED 24 September 2025 ACCEPTED 23 October 2025 PUBLISHED 05 November 2025 CITATION

Wang Y, Wang B, Liu S, Chen Y, Zhang S, Bu L, Zhu W, Liu X and Sun P (2025) Harnessing IgM for solid tumor therapy: biology, engineering advances, and translational challenges. Front. Immunol. 16:1712344. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1712344 COPYRIGHT

© 2025 Wang, Wang, Liu, Chen, Zhang, Bu, Zhu, Liu and Sun. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

Harnessing IgM for solid tumor therapy: biology, engineering advances, and translational challenges Yuhui Wang 1,2,3†, Bing Wang 4†, Shuhan Liu 3, Yinuo Chen 3, Shimei Zhang 1, Lifang Bu 3, Wenjing Zhu 5*, Xinlin Liu 1,2,3* and Peng Sun 1* 1 Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, The Affiliated Hospital of Qingdao University, Qingdao, China, 2 Qingdao Cancer Institute , Qingdao, China, 3 Qingdao Medical College, Qingdao University, Qingdao, China, 4 Biomedical Center of Qingdao University , Qingdao, China, 5 Medical Research Department, Qingdao Hospital, University of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences (Qingdao Municipal Hospital), Qingdao, China

Immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies are gaining renewed attention as nextgeneration platforms for cancer immunotherapy. Compared with IgG, IgM exhibits distinct biological advantages, including higher avidity from multivalent binding, potent complement activation, and enhanced recognition of heterogeneous tumor antigens within immunosuppressive microenvironments. These attributes position IgM as a promising candidate for solid tumor therapy, despite the absence of currently approved IgM-based therapeutics. Recent advances in genetic engineering, antibody design, and protein manufacturing have enabled the generation of diverse IgM formats—ranging from monoclonal and bispecific constructs to engineered IgM derivatives—demonstrating substantial antitumor potential in preclinical and early translational studies. Nonetheless, clinical development faces persistent challenges, including short serum half-life, restricted tumor penetration, structural and biophysical complexity, and scalability of production. In this review, we discuss the structure and biology of IgM, highlight progress in developing novel IgM-based antibody formats for solid tumors, and critically examine the key translational barriers and future opportunities. Together, these insights underscore the therapeutic promise of IgM and chart a path toward its integration into the next generation of antibody-based cancer immunotherapies.

IgM, immunotherapy, antibody therapy, solid tumor, clinical translations Frontiers in Immunology 01 frontiersin.org Wang et al. 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1712344

regions (14). Such a hinge structure is absent in IgM and IgE. The N-terminal region of the immunoglobulin is designated as the variable region and comprises three complementarity-determining regions (CDRs) capable of directly binding antigens, whereas the Cterminal part of the heavy chain is termed the constant region. Most immunoglobulins contain three constant domains (Cm1–Cm3), whereas IgM and IgE contain four (Cm1–Cm4). Each class is defined by a distinct heavy chain constant region structure that determines its effector functions and biological properties (15). Immunoglobulins are found in plasma and on B-cell surfaces. IgD, IgE, and IgG occur as monomers, while IgA is most commonly present as dimers. IgM exists as a monomer on B-cell surface but polymerizes into either a J chain–containing pentamer or a J chain–independent hexamer, with the pentameric form predominating in humans (16, 17). (An overview of the five immunoglobulin isotypes and the detailed architecture of IgM are presented in Figure 1). IgM is the first antibody isotype generated during the humoral immune response and plays a critical role in mucosal immunity, together with IgA. The IgM light chain comprises ~220 amino acids, whereas the heavy chain consists of ~576 amino acids. The Cterminus of IgM heavy chain contains tailpieces comprising an 18amino-acid peptide sequence (18). These tailpieces interact with one another, a process essential for IgM polymerization and assembly with the J chain (19). The J chain, a 137-amino acid polypeptide, is an essential component of polymeric IgM and joins two IgM-Fc molecules to stabilize the pentamer. Additionally, it facilitates IgM transport through interaction with polymeric immunoglobulin receptors (pIgR) (20, 21). Advances in cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) have yielded new insights into IgM structure. Contrary to the previously hypothesized pentagon, single-particle negative-stain electron microscopy revealed that the IgM pentamer adopts an asymmetric pentagon with a pronounced gap (18, 21, 22). Highresolution cryo-EM demonstrated that the pentameric core is an asymmetric, disc-shaped Fc ring formed by the constant regions (Cm2–Cm4) of ten m chains interlaced by disulfide bonds (23). IgM possesses an asymmetric, rigid core formed by the Cm4 and Cm3 constant regions and the J chain, with the Fab and Cm2 domains rotating as a unit around a hinge located at the Cm3/Cm2 interface. This structural feature is likely associated with multivalent binding of surface-associated antigens and the activation of the complement pathway (24). The Fc ring is asymmetric and relatively rigid, stabilized by the J chain, whereas the Fab arms exhibit wide mobility in their connection to the Fc ring via the hinge region (24). This architecture enables IgM to bind multiple antigenic epitopes and may facilitate multivalent engagement with tumorassociated antigens (25). Li et al. demonstrated that Fcm receptor (FcmR) binds specifically to the side of the IgM pentamer rather than in a random manner, and a single IgM pentamer can simultaneously bind up to four FcmR molecules. Moreover, the FcmR binding sites overlap with those of pIgR, suggesting mutually exclusive binding, thereby providing a structural basis for understanding IgM selection in distinct physiological pathways (26). These structural insights further indicate competition

1 Introduction Immunoglobulins (Igs) are essential glycoproteins that play a central role in the adaptive immune system and are synthesized by B lymphocytes and plasma cells. Humans have five major immunoglobulin isotypes: IgA, IgD, IgE, IgG, and IgM. Each isotype, including its subclasses, exhibits distinct structural and functional characteristics. Among these, IgG is the most abundant serum isotype and has become a cornerstone of cancer therapy due to its unique structural and functional properties (1). IgG antibodies demonstrate high target specificity, thereby enhancing therapeutic safety. Furthermore, IgG mediates immune responses via multiple mechanisms, such as antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) and antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis (ADCP) (1–4). These mechanisms have revolutionized oncology, enabling the development of targeted therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors and antibody–drug conjugates (5). However, IgG therapies face several limitations, including low avidity for antigens with low density or weak affinity as a result of their bivalency (6), restricted penetration into solid tumors, and a limited capacity for potent complement-mediated lysis. These limitations have stimulated interest in alternative isotypes, particularly immunoglobulin M (IgM). IgM antibodies have previously been explored in infectious and autoimmune diseases, where they enhanced pathogen clearance and immune regulation (7). These findings laid the groundwork for their development in cancer. IgM possesses ten binding sites, conferring higher binding avidity than IgG antibodies targeting the same epitope (8). This property enables IgM to bind effectively to low-density or weakly expressed tumor-associated antigens, thereby overcoming a key limitation of IgG. Its pentameric architecture further promotes potent complement activation and direct lysis of tumor cells (9). These functional advantages underscore the potential of developing novel antibody therapies based on IgM. Such therapies may overcome the shortcomings of IgG and provide a promising avenue for the effective treatment of solid tumors (10). In this review, we summarize the structural and biological features of IgM, outline recent advances in IgM-based therapeutic antibodies for solid tumor therapy, discuss major challenges such as short half-life, limited tumor penetration, and manufacturing complexity, and offer perspectives on future directions.

2 IgM structure and biology Immunoglobulins are proteins produced by immune cells, constituting an essential component of the immune system. They consist of two heavy chains (HCs) and two light chains (LCs). According to the type of heavy chain, immunoglobulins are classified into five isotypes (IgA, IgD, IgE, IgG, and IgM) (11, 12). The heavy and light chains are linked through disulfide bonds to form a Y-shaped structure (13). At the Y-shaped junction, one or more disulfide bonds are typically connected to the heavy chains, forming the hinge region that permits independent movement of the Fab arms and confers relative flexibility between Fab and Fc

Human immunoglobulin isotypes and IgM structure. Schematic representation of the five major immunoglobulin classes. Among them, IgM is secreted predominantly as a pentamer, conferring ten antigen-binding sites and high avidity. The right panel depicts the IgM monomer, highlighting the variable domains (Vm, VL), constant domains (Cm1–Cm4, CL), and the tailpiece that is essential for multimerization.

between FcmR and pIgR for binding sites, thereby modulating IgM transport and functional pathways (26, 27). Collectively, these observations suggest that IgM exerts potent complementdependent cytotoxicity (CDC) and may additionally regulate immune balance via receptor-mediated mechanisms. IgM functions as a critical first line of adaptive immune defense. Its unique structure confers high avidity, enabling efficient pathogen aggregation and toxin neutralization. Early studies showed that IgM activates complement to mediate immune responses (28). More recent studies have revealed that, beyond complement activation, IgM functions through alternative pathways. For example, in solid tumors, IgM may regulate the immune response via noncomplement-dependent mechanisms, such as FcmR-mediated pathways (29). Furthermore, although IgM has a larger molecular size than IgG, recent studies indicate that IgM has better relative distribution and selective accumulation in inflamed and tumor tissues due to the extravasation through leaky vasculature and subsequent inflammatory cell-mediated sequestration (ELVIS) phenomenon and the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect (30). These characteristics underscore the promise of IgM antibodies as therapeutic agents in cancer immunotherapy, particularly in the treatment of solid tumors.

mechanisms of monoclonal, bispecific, and engineered IgM antibodies are presented in Figure 2).

3.1 Natural IgM Natural IgM antibodies are primarily secreted by peritoneal B1 B cells and have the capacity to recognize and bind self-antigens. They play critical roles in both immunity and autoimmunity (31). Their polyreactivity and broad specificity enable recognition of pathogen-associated molecular patterns, apoptotic debris, and tumor-associated antigens (31, 32). Mechanistically, natural IgM mediates antitumor activity through two principal pathways. First, it strongly activates the classical complement cascade, inducing CDC and facilitating opsonization of tumor cells (33–35). Second, natural IgM can signal through the FcmR, shaping adaptive immune responses by influencing T- and B-cell cross-talk (36, 37). Together, these mechanisms provide a multifaceted defense against malignant transformation. Early work demonstrated that IgM antibodies against ganglioside GT1b significantly suppressed Ehrlich solid tumor growth, establishing one of the first links between natural IgM and direct tumor inhibition (38). In breast cancer, natural and adaptive IgM antibodies recognize aberrant glycan structures such as mucins, facilitating immune clearance of transformed cells and preventing tumor progression (39). For example, Atif et al. demonstrated that natural IgM is indispensable for early neoantigen recognition and the activation of adaptive immunity (40). It initiates a cascade of signaling events between monocytes and dendritic cells through immune complex formation, ultimately

3 Therapeutic IgM formats in solid tumors This section outlines the major types of IgM antibodies investigated in tumor therapy and summarizes their current research and clinical status. (Representative antitumor

Frontiers in Immunology 03 frontiersin.org Wang et al. 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1712344 FIGURE 2

Antitumor mechanisms of IgM antibody formats. (A) Monoclonal IgM antibodies mediate tumor cell lysis primarily through potent activation of the classical complement pathway. (B) Bispecific IgM antibodies concurrently engage tumor-associated antigens and T cells, thereby promoting cytokine release, immune synapse formation, and tumor cell cytotoxicity. (C) Engineered IgM antibodies are designed to overcome immunosuppression (e.g., targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis) and to stimulate proliferation and activation of effector immune cells, such as T cells and NK cells, ultimately inducing tumor cell death.

leading to the activation of CD8+ T cells and the induction of cytotoxic responses. This dual role has been validated in two cancer models, urethane-induced tumor and melanoma, underscoring its contribution not only as an innate defense molecule but also as a critical initiator of antitumor immunity (40). These findings suggest novel opportunities for immunotherapy. Natural IgM exhibits strong avidity for repetitive antigens and mediates potent CDC, features that have inspired the design of engineered IgM molecules. Its unique ability to recognize weakly expressed or structurally altered tumor antigens provides a conceptual foundation for engineering therapeutic IgM molecules inspired by natural prototypes. By leveraging these natural effector mechanisms, engineered IgM antibodies may overcome the limitations of IgG- Frontiers in Immunology

based antibodies, particularly in targeting heterogeneous and weakly expressed tumor antigens.

3.2 Monoclonal IgM antibodies Monoclonal IgM(mIgM) antibodies are fully human or humanized IgM molecules engineered to bind specific tumorassociated antigens with high affinity. Owing to their multivalent structure, mIgM antibodies can simultaneously engage multiple epitopes with strong avidity. Unlike IgG, which binds only two antigen sites, IgM can effectively target weakly expressed or heterogeneous antigens, making it especially valuable for solid

04 frontiersin.org Wang et al. 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1712344

Collectively, the multivalent structure and efficient cross-linking ability of IGM-8444 address key limitations of IgG-based agonists, providing a promising approach for DR5-targeted therapy. Another well-studied candidate is PAT-SM6, a human IgM monoclonal antibody targeting a cancer-specific isoform of glucoseregulated protein 78 (GRP78), with additional binding to lowdensity lipoprotein (LDL) complexes through GRP78-mediated interactions (43) (Table 1). GRP78 is aberrantly expressed on the surface of various solid and brain tumors and is implicated in cancer progression (55, 56). PAT-SM6 exerts anticancer activity through apoptosis, proliferation inhibition, CDC, and the unique mechanism termed lipoptosis (42–44). Preclinical studies showed that selective cytotoxicity against melanoma, pancreatic cancer, and multiple myeloma cells while sparing normal tissues. In a Phase 1 trial with 12 heavily pretreated patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, PAT-SM6 achieved stable disease (SD) in 33.3% of patients, but no partial or complete responses were observed (45, 46, 57). By contrast, SAM-6, another IgM antibody derived from the same research group, specifically recognizes an oxidized LDL receptor variant expressed on malignant cells and induces apoptosis through lipid accumulation (lipoptosis) (47, 48). However, SAM-6 has not yet entered clinical trials; its development remains at the preclinical stage. Another promising monoclonal antibody is AT101, a complement-fixing mouse IgM that targets glypican-1 (GPC1) (Table 1). GPC1 is a cell surface proteoglycan that is highly expressed in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) tumor tissues but shows little to no expression in normal pancreatic tissue or chronic pancreatitis (49). It is associated with several growth factors that promote cancer cell proliferation, angiogenesis, and metastasis. AT101 is capable of selectively triggering complement activation and promoting the recruitment of immune effector cells within the tumor microenvironment (TME). In an experiment, it was

tumor therapy. Recent studies have highlighted unique tumorkilling mechanisms mediated by IgM. In some situations, IgM can induce non-canonical, complement-independent cytotoxicity, including receptor-interacting serine/threonine-protein kinase (RIPK)-independent necroptosis and lipoptosis through lipid accumulation pathways, which are unique pathways that IgG antibodies don’t possess. For example, experimental evidence demonstrated that only IgM antibodies, especially clone M6-1D4, significantly reduce the viability of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) cell lines by inducing RIPK-independent necroptosis, while the IgG antibodies were ineffective (41). PAT-SM6 can induce lipoptosis via GRP78–LDL complex internalization (42). These findings emphasize the distinctive advantages of IgM over IgG in solid tumors. Several mIgM antibodies have shown encouraging preclinical and early clinical potential. IGM-8444 (Aplitabart), although molecularly engineered to enhance DR5 clustering and agonistic signaling, remains a monospecific IgM antibody and is therefore discussed within the monoclonal IgM category (Table 1). Preclinical studies revealed that IGM-8444 binds DR5 with high affinity and induces potent cytotoxicity compared with IgG agonists (8). In Colo205 cells, IGM-8444 was more than 10,000-fold more potent than anti-DR5 IgG. Importantly, it exhibited no hepatotoxicity at concentrations up to 500 mg/mL, whereas TNF-related apoptosisinducing ligand (TRAIL) induced toxicity with an IC50 of 0.04 mg/ mL. Broad screening across 190 cancer cell lines representing 15 solid and 5 hematological tumors showed strong responses in 25 cell lines (IC50 < 2 ng/mL), moderate responses in 75, and weak responses in 90. Combination studies further demonstrated synergistic activity with chemotherapy agents and the BCL-2 inhibitor ABT-199, without additional hepatotoxicity. In vivo, IGM-8444 inhibited tumor growth in a dose-dependent manner and achieved complete remission in the gastric PDX model.

TABLE 1 Summary of therapeutic IgM antibodies investigated in solid tumors. Antibody Institute/Company Type Target(s) MOA Phase/clinical trial ID/indication Reference IGM-8444 (Aplitabart) IGM Biosciences

Monospecific IgM DR5 DR5 clustering; apoptosis induction; CDC Phase 1a/1b/ (NCT04553692)/solid tumors (8) PAT-SM6 Patrys Ltd. Monospecific IgM GRP78 (and GRP78–LDL complex) Apoptosis; lipoptosis; complement activation

Phase 1 completed/ (NCT01727778)/multiple myeloma (42–46) SAM-6 Patrys Ltd. Monospecific IgM Oxidized LDL receptor variant Lipid accumulation; lipoptosis Preclinical/solid tumors (47, 48) AT101 Centro Di Riferimento Oncologico (CRO) Di Aviano IRCCS

Monospecific IgM GPC1 CDC; tumor growth inhibition Preclinical/solid tumors (49, 50) IGM-2323 (Imvotamab) IGM Biosciences Bispecific IgM CD20 × CD3 TDCC; low cytokine release Phase 1/2/(NCT04082936)/ B-cell malignancies

(51, 52) IGM-2644 IGM Biosciences Bispecific IgM CD38 × CD3 CDC; TDCC; low cytokine release Phase 1/(NCT05908396)/ multiple myeloma (53) IGM-7354 IGM Biosciences Engineered IgM PD-L1 × IL-15 NK/T-cell activation; IL-15 stimulation; antitumor activity

Phase 1 completed/ (NCT05702424)/solid tumors (54) Frontiers in Immunology 05 frontiersin.org Wang et al. 10.3389/fimmu.2025.1712344

(R/R NHL), objective responses were observed in 11 of 38 evaluable patients (29%), including 8complete responses (21%). Notably, activity was seen even in heavily pretreated patients, including those who had undergone CAR-T therapy (52). Based on the encouraging results of IGM-2323 (imvotamab), IGM Biosciences developed a novel CD38×CD3 bispecific IgM T cell engager, IGM2644 (Table 1). It has 10 binding sites for human CD38, and a single anti-CD3 scFv fused to the joining (J) chain. Previous clinical studies have already demonstrated that IGM-2644 exhibits dual CDC and TDCC mechanisms and demonstrates activity against daratumumab-resistant tumor cells. In addition, IGM-2644 also demonstrated reduced T cell fratricide compared to bispecific IgGs (53). Currently, IGM-2644 has an ongoing Phase 1 clinical trial (NCT05908396) for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. However, despite this encouraging activity, IGM Biosciences announced in January 2025 that it would terminate all cancerrelated pipelines following the failure to achieve expected outcomes and difficulties in strategic development. This result underscores the significant translational challenges facing bsIgMs development. Although preclinical studies indicated potent antitumor activity and reduced cytokine release in vitro and in murine models, these findings did not translate consistently into clinical efficacy. The experience with IGM-2323 and IGM-2644 highlights the urgent need to design safer and more effective bsIgM formats. Despite their promise, bsIgMs face multiple challenges related to structure, manufacturing, and translation. The large pentameric structure of IgM complicates protein folding, stability, and purification, resulting in low yields and batch variability (63). Maintaining high affinity at both binding sites adds further complexity to structural design and production. Additionally, IgM antibodies have relatively short half-lives compared with IgG formats (64), and their large size can hinder penetration and distribution within solid tumors, particularly in dense or immune-excluded tissues. Safety concerns, including immunogenicity and the risks of cytokine release, necessitate cautious dose escalation and rigorous clinical monitoring (54, 65).

proven that AT101 can effectively inhibit tumor growth and prolong survival in PDAC xenograft models (50). The data indicate that the average survival time of mice in the AT101 group was significantly longer than that of the control group. Among the mice treated with AT101, most had a reduction in tumor mass, and one achieved complete tumor remission. Moreover, no toxicity was observed in the mice that received multiple injections of AT101. However, AT101 remains in preclinical development, and the critical step in clinical translation will be humanization of the antibody. Despite these advances, major challenges remain for monoclonal IgM development. Their large molecular size(900– 950 kDa for pentamers and 1050–1150 kDa for hexamers), limited stability, and short pharmacokinetic half-life complicates large-scale production and purification (58). Furthermore, most mIgM-based therapies are still in preclinical or early clinical stages, and further optimization, including combination strategies, will be essential to realize their full therapeutic potential.

3.3 Bispecific IgM antibodies The treatment of solid tumors remains highly challenging because of the complexity of the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment, the heterogeneity of antigen expression, and the limited penetration of large-molecule antibodies into tumor tissues. While monoclonal antibodies provide clinical benefit, their effectiveness is often constrained under those conditions. Bispecific antibodies (bsAbs) have emerged as a representative innovative therapeutic strategy (59, 60). In the bispecific antibodies for treating solid tumors, IgG plays a dominant role due to its longer half-life and efficient immune function. However, their bivalency and limited Fc-mediated clustering often constrain activity in lowantigen-density tumors, motivating the exploration of multivalent alternatives such as IgM (61). Recently, the development of bispecific IgM (bsIgM) antibodies has attracted growing attention, extending beyond infectious diseases to cancer therapy. Although research is still in its early stages, the structural and functional properties of bsIgMs make them a promising approach for overcoming the limitations of existing antibody formats. BsIgMs combine the multivalency of IgM, which has ten antigen-binding sites, with the bispecificity function, and can simultaneously bind to tumor antigens and immune cell markers. This dual capacity provides a distinctive platform for solid tumor treatment. Their high avidity enables effective binding to low-density tumor antigens, and the pentameric structure enhances immune effector activation via complement and Fc receptors (9, 16, 62). Compared with bispecific IgGs, bsIgMs have demonstrated superior biological activity. For instance, IgM-2323 (Imvotamab), a CD20×CD3 bsIgM, displayed 100-fold higher binding activity to CD20 than IgG-based T cell bispecifics, mediated CDC at levels 100-fold greater, and induced highly potent T cell-dependent cytotoxicity (TDCC) (51) (Table 1). In a Phase 1/1b clinical trial (NCT04082936) in relapsed or refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma

3.4 Engineered IgM formats Engineered IgM antibodies are designed to overcome the intrinsic limitations of natural IgM by introducing genetic or structural modifications. These engineered formats leverage the multivalency and immune-activating potential of IgM to enhance tumor targeting, particularly for low-density or heterogeneous antigens. Early studies demonstrated that IgM could serve as an efficient drug carrier. For example, methotrexate-conjugated IgM retained full antigen-binding activity and achieved superior antitumor efficacy in vivo compared with free drug or non-specific conjugates (66). Similarly, IgM-based radioimmunoconjugates labeled with a-particle emitters show highly potent and antigenspecific cytotoxicity in vitro and in vivo, with only a few isotopes per cell sufficient to induce growth inhibition (67).

A representative example is IGM-7354, developed by IGM Biosciences (Table 1). This antibody binds multiple PD-L1 receptors while simultaneously trans-presenting a single IL15/ IL15Ra complex via the j-chain to activate NK and CD8+ T cells both in vitro and in vivo. Preclinical studies demonstrated that IGM7354 exhibits high binding avidity, promotes NK and CD8+ T-cell proliferation, and inhibits tumor growth in PD-L1+ triple-negative breast cancer models. It also showed potent single-agent activity in xenograft models, enhanced antitumor effects in combination with ADCC-capable antibodies or CAR T cells, and robust immune activation in cynomolgus monkeys. Based on these data, IGM-7354 entered a Phase 1 clinical trial (NCT05702424) for advanced solid tumors (54). Other engineered IgM molecules, such as IGM-8444, further highlight the capacity of multivalent formats to improve death receptor clustering and amplify apoptosis signaling (8). Beyond immune checkpoint targeting, other engineered IgM formats are being explored. For instance, the IgM-based T-cell engagers have been designed to activate T cells and induce their killing effect on tumor cells through simultaneously targeting tumor antigens and T-cell receptors (38). Compared with traditional IgGbased bispecific antibodies, IgM-based designs may have higher stability and lower immunogenicity, thereby reducing treatmentrelated adverse reactions. IgM antibodies have long faced challenges in ADC development due to their high molecular weight, polymeric structure, and a large number of glycosylation sites, but the emergence of chemoenzymatic methods has provided a new platform for the development of IgM-ADCs (68). Recent advances include conditionally activated anti-IgM ADCs. The antibody is shielded by an IgM domain and becomes exposed only in the protease-rich TME. This strategy prevented off-target binding to soluble or normal B cell–expressed IgM, while allowing efficient MMAE-mediated cytotoxicity against malignant IgM+ lymphoma cells after activation (69). These findings highlight the diverse strategies of engineered IgM, from T-cell engagers to conditionally activated ADCs, underscoring its therapeutic versatility. Engineered IgM antibodies provide several advantages compared with IgG or other formats. Their multivalency confers high avidity, enabling efficient binding even to targets expressed at low antigen density within the tumor environment. Although engineered IgMs demonstrate improved stability, extended halflife, and enhanced delivery efficiency compared with natural IgM, significant hurdles remain. From a manufacturing perspective, due to the large molecular size and complex quaternary structure of IgM expression, assembly, and purification often lead to low yields and batch variability. Pharmacokinetically, IgM molecules display rapid systemic clearance and limited tissue penetration, creating a need to balance half-life extension with tumor accessibility. In addition, the multivalency of IgM may increase risks of unwanted complement activation, off-target immune responses, or cytokine release, particularly at high doses or in multifunctional constructs. Advances in protein engineering, optimization of bioprocess, and carefully designed clinical trials will be critical to realize the therapeutic potential of engineered IgM antibodies.

4 Challenges and perspectives Immunoglobulin M (IgM) antibodies are re-emerging as a promising therapeutic modality for solid tumors. Although notable advances have been made in IgM research, design, and structural characterization, several unmet needs remain. Importantly, current IgM studies are still at an early stage, and more reliable preclinical models are required to predict and evaluate efficacy, toxicity, and pharmacokinetics before translation into human clinical trials. One of the most significant challenges is the short half-life of IgM (9). In 1964, Barth et al. reported that the half-life of IgM was 5.1 days, whereas IgG antibodies exhibit a half-life of up to 21 days or longer (70, 71). This discrepancy is largely attributable to the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn), which binds endogenous IgG, protecting it from lysosomal degradation and recycling it back into circulation (72). IgM, however, does not undergo this protective pathway. Engineering IgM with FcRnbinding domains (73–76), albumin-fusion motifs, or protective approaches such as liposomal encapsulation or PEGylation (77) has shown promise in extending its circulation time. In addition to advances in antibody engineering, a deeper understanding of Fc receptor (FcR) biology is essential for optimizing IgM-based therapeutics. FcRs are immune receptors that bind to the Fc region of Igs and play central roles in antibody effector functions (78). While IgG primarily exerts its effects through Fc gamma receptors (FcgRs) to mediate cytotoxic and phagocytic responses, IgM interacts mainly with the complement system and FcmR. Extensive research has focused on FcgRs, which display distinct expression patterns across immune effector cells, including macrophages, dendritic cells, NK cells, neutrophils, and B cells, where they regulate ADCC, phagocytosis, and cytokine production (79). Activating receptors such as FcgRI (CD64), FcgRIIA (CD32A), and FcgRIIIA (CD16A) promote immune activation, whereas the inhibitory FcgRIIB (CD32B) counterbalances these signals to maintain immune homeostasis (80). Understanding this bidirectional regulation provides valuable insight into the rational design of IgM-based therapeutic strategies. FcmR specifically binds to the Fc region of pentameric or hexameric IgM with high affinity, modulating B- and T-cell responses and contributing to immune homeostasis (62). However, its precise role in regulating IgM-mediated antitumor immunity remains largely unexplored, representing a critical frontier for the clinical translation of IgM-based therapeutic approaches. Despite its multivalency and strong binding avidity, IgM’s large molecular size restricts penetration into dense, stromal-rich tumors. Furthermore, TME features such as elevated interstitial fluid pressure, hypoxia, and acidic pH may impair IgM stability and activity (81, 82). While potent complement activation by IgM can induce tumor cell lysis, it may also amplify pro-inflammatory signaling, thereby exacerbating TME dysfunction (83). Future studies are needed to better elucidate the interaction between IgM and TME, which may enable more precise strategies for tumor targeting. Manufacturability and stability represent additional barriers. The structural complexity of IgM complicates large-scale production and reduces biophysical stability during formulation

(9). Encouragingly, advances in related fields have brought new opportunities for IgM development. The concept of developability, which has been critical in the optimization of IgG antibodies (84– 86), may similarly help identify superior IgM candidates and streamline drug development. In addition, progress in computational technologies is likely to facilitate the discovery of IgM molecules with enhanced biophysical and pharmacological properties (87). Optimizing expression hosts, applying glycoengineering, and employing machine learning–based developability screening could significantly improve IgM yield and formulation stability. Recent advances in antibody engineering, expression systems, and bioprocess optimization have begun to address these limitations (58). The future success of IgM therapies for solid tumors will depend on continued progress in antibody engineering, translational biology, and clinical development. With deeper insights into IgM biology and the emergence of innovative formats, improved strategies are expected to overcome current challenges, thereby accelerating the translation of IgM-based therapeutics into clinical trials and ultimately providing new hope for patients with solid tumors.

by the Natural Science Foundation of Shandong Province Grants ZR202111120048 (Wenjing Zhu), ZR2022QH201 (Xinlin Liu) and ZR2024MC119 (Xinlin Liu), 2022 Shinan District Science and Technology Plan Project Grants 2023-2-015-YY (Wenjing Zhu), Development of innovative medical devices for pediatric ophthalmology based on machine vision and eye tracking technology Grants 24-1-5-yqpy-23-qy (Wenjing Zhu), the role and mechanism of SnoRD14E-PBX3 axis in regulating the progression of lung adenocarcinoma Grants 82473113 (Wenjing Zhu), the National Natural Science Foundation of China Grants 32300788 (Xinlin Liu).

Conflict of interest The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Generative AI statement The author(s) declare that no Generative AI was used in the creation of this manuscript. Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.

Author contributions YW: Conceptualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. BW: Supervision, Writing – review & editing. SL: Writing – review & editing. YC: Writing – review & editing. SZ: Writing – review & editing. LB: Writing – review & editing. WZ:

📖 中文全文 Chinese Full Text

中文

# 利用IgM进行实体肿瘤治疗:生物学、工程进展与转化挑战

**王宇辉1,2,3†,王冰4†,刘书翰3,陈一诺3,张诗美1,卜丽芳3,朱文静5*,刘新林1,2,3*,孙鹏1***

1青岛大学附属医院肝胆胰外科,中国青岛;2青岛癌症研究所,中国青岛;3青岛大学青岛医学院,中国青岛;4青岛大学生物医学中心,中国青岛;5青岛大学健康与康复科学附属医院(青岛市立医院)医学研究部,中国青岛

---

## 摘要

免疫球蛋白M(IgM)抗体作为癌症免疫治疗的新一代平台正重新受到关注。与IgG相比,IgM具有独特的生物学优势,包括多价结合带来的高亲和力、强效的补体激活能力,以及在免疫抑制微环境中对异质性肿瘤抗原的增强识别能力。这些特性使IgM成为实体肿瘤治疗的有前景候选者,尽管目前尚无获批的IgM类治疗药物。近年来,在基因工程、抗体设计和蛋白质生产方面的进展使得多种IgM形式的开发成为可能——从单特异性到双特异性构建体,再到工程化IgM衍生物——在临床前和早期转化研究中展现出显著的抗肿瘤潜力。然而,临床开发仍面临诸多持续存在的挑战,包括血清半衰期短、肿瘤穿透受限、结构和生物物理复杂性以及生产的可扩展性。本综述讨论了IgM的结构和生物学特性,重点介绍了用于实体肿瘤的新型IgM抗体形式的进展,并批判性地分析了关键的转化障碍和未来机遇。综合来看,这些见解凸显了IgM的治疗前景,并为其整合到下一代基于抗体的癌症免疫治疗中指明了方向。

**关键词:** IgM,免疫治疗,抗体治疗,实体肿瘤,临床转化

---

## 1 引言

免疫球蛋白(Igs)是适应性免疫系统中发挥核心作用的重要糖蛋白,由B淋巴细胞和浆细胞合成。人类有五种主要的免疫球蛋白同种型:IgA、IgD、IgE、IgG和IgM。每种同种型(包括其亚类)具有不同的结构和功能特征。其中,IgG是血清中含量最丰富的同种型,因其独特的结构和功能特性已成为癌症治疗的基石(1)。IgG抗体表现出高靶标特异性,从而增强了治疗安全性。此外,IgG通过多种机制介导免疫反应,如抗体依赖性细胞介导的细胞毒性(ADCC)和抗体依赖性细胞吞噬作用(ADCP)(1-4)。这些机制彻底改变了肿瘤学领域,使得免疫检查点抑制剂和抗体-药物偶联物等靶向治疗得以开发(5)。

然而,IgG治疗面临若干局限性,包括由于其双价性导致的对低密度或弱亲和力抗原的低亲和力(6)、实体肿瘤穿透受限,以及强效补体介导裂解能力有限。这些局限性激发了人们对替代同种型的兴趣,尤其是免疫球蛋白M(IgM)。IgM抗体此前已在感染性疾病和自身免疫性疾病中得到探索,在增强病原体清除和免疫调节方面显示出效果(7)。这些发现为其在癌症领域的发展奠定了基础。IgM具有十个结合位点,对相同表位的结合亲和力高于IgG抗体(8)。这一特性使IgM能够有效结合低密度或弱表达的肿瘤相关抗原,从而克服了IgG的关键局限性。其五聚体结构进一步促进了强效的补体激活和肿瘤细胞的直接裂解(9)。这些功能优势凸显了基于IgM开发新型抗体疗法的潜力。此类疗法可能克服IgG的不足,为实体肿瘤的有效治疗提供有前景的途径(10)。在本综述中,我们总结了IgM的结构和生物学特征,概述了用于实体肿瘤治疗的IgM治疗性抗体的最新进展,讨论了半衰期短、肿瘤穿透受限和生产复杂性等主要挑战,并对未来方向提出了展望。

---

## 2 IgM的结构与生物学

免疫球蛋白是由免疫细胞产生的蛋白质,是免疫系统的重要组成部分。它们由两条重链(HCs)和两条轻链(LCs)组成。根据重链类型,免疫球蛋白分为五种同种型(IgA、IgD、IgE、IgG和IgM)(11, 12)。重链和轻链通过二硫键连接形成Y形结构(13)。在Y形连接处,一个或多个二硫键通常与重链相连,形成铰链区,允许Fab臂的独立运动并赋予Fab与Fc之间的相对灵活性(14)。IgM和IgE中不存在这样的铰链结构。免疫球蛋白的N端区域被称为可变区,包含三个能够直接结合抗原的互补决定区(CDRs),而重链的C端部分被称为恒定区。大多数免疫球蛋白包含三个恒定结构域(Cμ1-Cμ3),而IgM和IgE包含四个(Cμ1-Cμ4)。每种类别由不同的重链恒定区结构定义,这决定了其效应功能和生物学特性(15)。

免疫球蛋白存在于血浆和B细胞表面。IgD、IgE和IgG以单体形式存在,而IgA通常以二聚体形式存在。IgM在B细胞表面以单体形式存在,但可聚合为含J链的五聚体或不含J链的六聚体,其中五聚体形式在人类中占主导地位(16, 17)。(五种免疫球蛋白同种型及IgM详细结构的概述见图1。)

IgM是体液免疫反应中最早产生的抗体同种型,与IgA一起在黏膜免疫中发挥关键作用。IgM轻链包含约220个氨基酸,而重链包含约576个氨基酸。IgM重链的C端包含由18个氨基酸肽序列组成的尾部片段(18)。这些尾部片段彼此相互作用,这一过程对IgM的聚合和与J链的组装至关重要(19)。J链是一个由137个氨基酸组成的多肽,是聚合IgM的重要组分,它连接两个IgM-Fc分子以稳定五聚体。此外,J链通过与多聚免疫球蛋白受体(pIgR)的相互作用促进IgM的转运(20, 21)。

冷冻电子显微镜(cryo-EM)的进展为IgM结构提供了新的见解。与此前假设的五边形不同,单颗粒负染电子显微镜揭示IgM五聚体呈现为具有明显间隙的不对称五边形(18, 21, 22)。高分辨率cryo-EM表明,五聚体核心是由十条μ链的恒定区(Cμ2-Cμ4)通过二硫键交错形成的不对称盘状Fc环(23)。IgM具有由Cμ4和Cμ3恒定区以及J链形成的不对称刚性核心,Fab和Cμ2结构域作为一个整体围绕位于Cμ3/Cμ2界面的铰链旋转。这一结构特征可能与表面相关抗原的多价结合和补体途径的激活有关(24)。Fc环呈不对称且相对刚性,由J链稳定,而Fab臂通过铰链区与Fc环的连接表现出广泛的活动性(24)。这种结构使IgM能够结合多个抗原表位,并可能促进与肿瘤相关抗原的多价结合(25)。Li等人证明,Fcμ受体(FcμR)特异性结合IgM五聚体的侧面而非随机结合,单个IgM五聚体可同时结合多达四个FcμR分子。此外,FcμR的结合位点与pIgR的结合位点重叠,提示相互排斥的结合,从而为理解IgM在不同生理途径中的选择提供了结构基础(26)。这些结构见解进一步表明FcμR与pIgR之间在结合位点上存在竞争,从而调节IgM的转运和功能途径(26, 27)。综合来看,这些观察结果表明IgM发挥强效的补体依赖性细胞毒性(CDC),并可能通过受体介导的机制额外调节免疫平衡。

IgM作为适应性免疫防御的关键第一道防线发挥作用。其独特结构赋予高亲和力,使其能够有效聚集病原体和中和毒素。早期研究表明IgM激活补体以介导免疫反应(28)。更多近期研究揭示,除补体激活外,IgM还通过替代途径发挥作用。例如,在实体肿瘤中,IgM可能通过非补体依赖性机制(如FcμR介导的途径)调节免疫反应(29)。此外,尽管IgM分子量大于IgM,但近期研究表明,由于渗漏血管外渗和随后炎症细胞介导的滞留(ELVIS)现象以及增强的渗透和滞留(EPR)效应,IgM在炎症和肿瘤组织中具有更好的相对分布和选择性蓄积(30)。这些特征凸显了IgM抗体作为癌症免疫治疗(特别是实体肿瘤治疗)治疗药物的前景。

---

## 3 实体肿瘤中的治疗性IgM形式

本节概述了肿瘤治疗中研究的主要IgM抗体类型,并总结了当前的研究和临床状态。(单特异性、双特异性和工程化IgM抗肿瘤机制见图2。)

### 3.1 天然IgM

天然IgM抗体主要由腹膜B1 B细胞分泌,具有识别和结合自身抗原的能力。它们在免疫和自身免疫中均发挥关键作用(31)。其多反应性和广谱特异性使其能够识别病原体相关分子模式、凋亡碎片和肿瘤相关抗原(31, 32)。从机制上讲,天然IgM通过两条主要途径介导抗肿瘤活性。首先,它强烈激活经典补体级联反应,诱导CDC并促进肿瘤细胞的调理作用(33-35)。其次,天然IgM可通过FcμR发出信号,通过影响T细胞和B细胞的交叉对话来塑造适应性免疫反应(36, 37)。综合来看,这些机制为对抗恶性转化提供了多方面的防御。

早期工作表明,针对神经节苷脂GT1b的IgM抗体显著抑制了Ehrlich实体肿瘤的生长,建立了天然IgM与直接肿瘤抑制之间的最早联系之一(38)。在乳腺癌中,天然和适应性IgM抗体识别异常聚糖结构(如黏蛋白),促进转化细胞的免疫清除并阻止肿瘤进展(39)。例如,Atif等人证明,天然IgM对新抗原的早期识别和适应性免疫的激活不可或缺(40)。它通过免疫复合物形成启动单核细胞和树突状细胞之间的一系列信号事件,最终导致CD8+ T细胞的激活和细胞毒性反应的诱导。这一双重作用在两种癌症模型——urethane诱导的肿瘤和黑色素瘤——中得到验证,强调了它不仅作为先天防御分子,而且作为抗肿瘤免疫关键启动因子的贡献(40)。这些发现为免疫治疗提供了新的机会。天然IgM对重复抗原表现出强亲和力并介导强效CDC,这些特性启发了工程化IgM分子的设计。其识别弱表达或结构改变的肿瘤抗原的独特能力为受天然原型启发的工程化治疗性IgM分子的开发提供了概念基础。通过利用这些天然效应机制,工程化IgM抗体可能克服基于IgG的抗体的局限性,特别是在靶向异质性和弱表达的肿瘤抗原方面。

### 3.2 单克隆IgM抗体

单克隆IgM(mIgM)抗体是完全人源化或人源化的IgM分子,经工程化改造以高亲和力结合特定的肿瘤相关抗原。由于其多价结构,mIgM抗体可同时以强亲和力结合多个表位。与仅结合两个抗原位点的IgG不同,IgM可有效靶向弱表达或异质性抗原,使其在实体肿瘤治疗中特别有价值。近期研究强调了IgM介导的独特肿瘤杀伤机制。在某些情况下,IgM可诱导非经典的、补体非依赖性的细胞毒性,包括受体相互作用丝氨酸/苏氨酸蛋白激酶(RIPK)非依赖性的坏死性凋亡和通过脂质积累途径的脂凋亡(lipoptosis),这些是IgG抗体所不具备的独特途径。例如,实验证据表明,仅IgM抗体,尤其是克隆M6-1D4,通过诱导RIPK非依赖性坏死性凋亡显著降低肝细胞癌(HCC)细胞系的活力,而IgG抗体则无效(41)。PAT-SM6可通过GRP78-LDL复合物内化诱导脂凋亡(42)。这些发现强调了IgM在实体肿瘤中相对于IgG的独特优势。

几种mIgM抗体已显示出令人鼓舞的临床前和早期临床潜力。IGM-8444(Aplitabart)虽然经过分子工程化改造以增强DR5簇集和激动信号传导,但仍为单特异性IgM抗体,因此归入单克隆IgM类别讨论(表1)。临床前研究表明,IGM-8444以高亲和力结合DR5,与IgG激动剂相比诱导更强的细胞毒性(8)。在Colo205细胞中,IGM-8444的效力比抗-DR5 IgG高10,000倍以上。重要的是,在浓度高达500 mg/mL时未表现出肝毒性,而TNF相关凋亡诱导配体(TRAIL)在IC50为0.04 mg/mL时即诱导毒性。在代表15种实体肿瘤和5种血液肿瘤的190种癌细胞系中进行的广泛筛选显示,25种细胞系呈强反应(IC50 < 2 ng/mL),75种呈中等反应,90种呈弱反应。联合研究进一步证明了与化疗药物和BCL-2抑制剂ABT-199的协同活性,且无额外肝毒性。在体内,IGM-8444以剂量依赖性方式抑制肿瘤生长,并在胃PDX模型中实现了完全缓解。综合来看,IGM-8444的多价结构和有效交联能力解决了IgG类激动剂的关键局限性,为DR5靶向治疗提供了有前景的方法。

另一个研究较为深入的候选药物是PAT-SM6,这是一种人IgM单克隆抗体,靶向葡萄糖调节蛋白78(GRP78)的癌症特异性异构体,并通过GRP78介导的相互作用额外结合低密度脂蛋白(LDL)复合物(43)(表1)。GRP78在多种实体瘤和脑肿瘤表面异常表达,与癌症进展相关(55, 56)。PAT-SM6通过凋亡、增殖抑制、CDC和称为脂凋亡的独特机制发挥抗癌活性(42-44)。临床前研究表明其对黑色素瘤、胰腺癌和多发性骨髓瘤细胞具有选择性细胞毒性,同时不损伤正常组织。在一项针对12名经过大量预治疗的复发或难治性多发性骨髓瘤患者的I期试验中,PAT-SM6在33.3%的患者中实现了疾病稳定(SD),但未观察到部分或完全缓解(45, 46, 57)。相比之下,SAM-6是同一研究团队衍生的另一种IgM抗体,特异性识别在恶性细胞上表达的氧化LDL受体变体,并通过脂质积累(脂凋亡)诱导凋亡(47, 48)。然而,SAM-6尚未进入临床试验,其开发仍处于临床前阶段。

另一种有前景的单克隆抗体是AT101,这是一种补体固定的小鼠IgM,靶向磷脂酰肌醇蛋白聚糖-1(GPC1)(表1)。GPC1是一种细胞表面蛋白聚糖,在胰腺导管腺癌(PDAC)肿瘤组织中高度表达,但在正常胰腺组织或慢性胰腺炎中几乎不表达(49)。它与促进癌细胞增殖、血管生成和转移的多种生长因子相关。AT101能够在肿瘤微环境(TME)内选择性触发补体激活并促进免疫效应细胞的招募。实验证明AT101可有效抑制PDAC异种移植模型中的肿瘤生长并延长生存期(50)。数据显示,AT101组小鼠的平均生存时间显著长于对照组。在接受AT101治疗的小鼠中,大多数肿瘤质量减小,其中一只实现了完全肿瘤缓解。此外,接受多次AT101注射的小鼠未观察到毒性。然而,AT101仍处于临床前开发阶段,临床转化的关键步骤将是抗体的人源化。

尽管取得了这些进展,单克隆IgM的开发仍面临重大挑战。其大分子量(五聚体900-950 kDa,六聚体1050-1150 kDa)、有限的稳定性和短的药代动力学半衰期使大规模生产和纯化变得复杂(58)。此外,大多数基于mIgM的治疗仍处于临床前或早期临床阶段,进一步的优化(包括联合策略)对于实现其全部治疗潜力至关重要。

### 3.3 双特异性IgM抗体

由于免疫抑制性肿瘤微环境的复杂性、抗原表达异质性以及大分子抗体向肿瘤组织穿透的局限性,实体肿瘤的治疗仍然极具挑战性。虽然单克隆抗体提供了临床益处,但这些条件下的有效性往往受到限制。双特异性抗体(bsAbs)已成为代表性的创新治疗策略(59, 60)。在治疗实体肿瘤的双特异性抗体中,IgG因其更长的半衰期和高效的免疫功能而占据主导地位。然而,其双价性和有限的Fc介导的簇集往往限制其在低抗原密度肿瘤中的活性,这促使人们探索多价替代物如IgM(61)。近年来,双特异性IgM(bsIgM)抗体的开发引起了越来越多的关注,其应用范围已从传染病扩展到癌症治疗。尽管研究仍处于早期阶段,但bsIgMs的结构和功能特性使其成为克服现有抗体形式局限性的有前景的方法。bsIgMs结合了IgM的十抗原结合位点多价性和双特异性功能,可同时结合肿瘤抗原和免疫细胞标志物。这种双重能力为实体肿瘤治疗提供了独特的平台。其高亲和力使其能够有效结合低密度肿瘤抗原,五聚体结构通过补体和Fc受体增强免疫效应激活(9, 16, 62)。

与双特异性IgG相比,bsIgMs已展现出更优越的生物学活性。例如,IgM-2323(Imvotamab),一种CD20×CD3 bsIgM,对CD20的结合活性比基于IgG的T细胞双特异性抗体高100倍,介导CDC的水平高100倍,并诱导高效的T细胞依赖性细胞毒性(TDCC)(51)(表1)。在一项针对复发或难治性非霍奇金淋巴瘤(R/R NHL)的I/Ib期临床试验(NCT04082936)中,38名可评估患者中有11名(29%)观察到客观反应,包括8名完全缓解(21%)。值得注意的是,即使在经过大量预治疗的患者(包括接受过CAR-T治疗的患者)中也观察到活性(52)。基于IGM-2323(imvotamab)的令人鼓舞的结果,IGM Biosciences开发了一种新型CD38×CD3双特异性IgM T细胞衔接器IGM-2644(表1)。它对人CD38具有10个结合位点,并有一个与连接(J)链融合的抗CD3 scFv。先前的临床研究已证明IGM-2644表现出双重CDC和TDCC机制,并对达雷妥尤单抗耐药肿瘤细胞显示出活性。此外,IGM-2644还表现出与双特异性IgG相比降低的T细胞自相残杀(fratricide)(53)。目前,IGM-2644正在开展针对复发/难治性多发性骨髓瘤的I期临床试验(NCT05908396)。

然而,尽管有这些令人鼓舞的活性,IGM Biosciences在2025年1月宣布终止所有癌症相关管线,原因是未能达到预期结果以及战略开发困难。这一结果凸显了bsIgMs开发面临的重大转化挑战。尽管临床前研究在体外和小鼠模型中显示出强效的抗肿瘤活性和减少的细胞因子释放,但这些发现并未一致地转化为临床疗效。IGM-2323和IGM-2644的经验凸显了设计更安全、更有效的bsIgM形式的迫切需求。

尽管前景广阔,bsIgMs在结构、生产和转化方面面临多重挑战。IgM的大五聚体结构使蛋白质折叠、稳定性和纯化变得复杂,导致产量低和批次间差异(63)。在两个结合位点维持高亲和力为结构设计和生产增加了额外的复杂性。此外,与IgG形式相比,IgM抗体的半衰期相对较短(64),其大尺寸可能阻碍在实体肿瘤中的穿透和分布,特别是在致密或免疫排斥的组织中。安全性问题,包括免疫原性和细胞因子释放的风险,需要谨慎的剂量递增和严格的临床监测(54, 65)。

### 3.4 工程化IgM形式

工程化IgM抗体旨在通过引入基因或结构修饰来克服天然IgM的内在局限性。这些工程化形式利用IgM的多价性和免疫激活潜力来增强肿瘤靶向,特别是针对低密度或异质性抗原。早期研究表明,IgM可作为有效的药物载体。例如,甲氨蝶呤偶联的IgM保留了完全的抗原结合活性,与游离药物或非特异性偶联物相比,在体内实现了更优越的抗肿瘤疗效(66)。同样,用α粒子发射体标记的IgM类放射免疫偶联物在体外和体内均显示出高效力和抗原特异性的细胞毒性,每个细胞仅需几个同位素即可诱导生长抑制(67)。

一个代表性例子是IGM Biosciences开发的IGM-7354(表1)。该抗体结合多个PD-L1受体,同时通过J链反式呈递单个IL-15/IL-15Ra复合物,在体外和体内激活NK和CD8+ T细胞。临床前研究表明,IGM-7354表现出高结合亲和力,促进NK和CD8+ T细胞增殖,并在PD-L1+三阴性乳腺癌模型中抑制肿瘤生长。它还在异种移植模型中显示出强效的单药活性,与ADCC活性抗体或CAR T细胞联合使用可增强抗肿瘤效果,并在食蟹猴中表现出强效的免疫激活。基于这些数据,IGM-7354进入了针对晚期实体肿瘤的I期临床试验(NCT05702424)(54)。其他工程化IgM分子,如IGM-8444,进一步凸显了多价形式改善死亡受体簇集和放大凋亡信号传导的能力(8)。

除免疫检查点靶向外,还在探索其他工程化IgM形式。例如,已设计基于IgM的T细胞衔接器,通过同时靶向肿瘤抗原和T细胞受体来激活T细胞并诱导其对肿瘤细胞的杀伤作用(38)。与传统的基于IgG的双特异性抗体相比,基于IgM的设计可能具有更高的稳定性和更低的免疫原性,从而减少治疗相关的不良反应。由于IgM的高分子量、多聚结构和大量糖基化位点,IgM抗体在ADC开发中长期面临挑战,但化学酶促方法的出现为IgM-ADC的开发提供了新平台(68)。最新进展包括条件激活型抗IgM ADC。该抗体被IgM结构域屏蔽,仅在富含蛋白酶的TME中暴露。该策略防止了与可溶性或正常B细胞表达的IgM的脱靶结合,同时在激活后允许对恶性IgM+淋巴瘤细胞进行高效的MMAE介导的细胞毒性(69)。这些发现凸显了工程化IgM的多样化策略,从T细胞衔接器到条件激活型ADC,强调了其治疗多功能性。

与IgG或其他形式相比,工程化IgM抗体具有若干优势。其多价性赋予高亲和力,即使在肿瘤环境中抗原密度低的情况下也能实现高效结合。尽管工程化IgM与天然IgM相比表现出改善的稳定性、延长的半衰期和增强的递送效率,但仍存在重大障碍。从生产角度来看,由于IgM的大分子量和复杂的四级结构,表达、组装和纯化往往导致产量低和批次间差异。在药代动力学方面,IgM分子表现出快速的系统清除和有限的肿瘤穿透,需要在延长半衰期与肿瘤可及性之间取得平衡。此外,IgM的多价性可能增加不希望的补体激活、脱靶免疫反应或细胞因子释放的风险,特别是在高剂量或多功能构建体中。蛋白质工程的进展、生物工艺的优化以及精心设计的临床试验对于实现工程化IgM抗体的治疗潜力至关重要。

---

## 4 挑战与展望

免疫球蛋白M(IgM)抗体正重新成为实体肿瘤的有前景的治疗方式。尽管在IgM研究、设计和结构表征方面取得了显著进展,但仍存在若干未满足的需求。重要的是,目前的IgM研究仍处于早期阶段,在转化为人体临床试验之前,需要更可靠的临床前模型来预测和评估疗效、毒性和药代动力学。

最重大的挑战之一是IgM的半衰期短(9)。1964年,Barth等人报道IgM的半衰期为5.1天,而IgG抗体的半衰期长达21天或更长(70, 71)。这种差异主要归因于新生儿Fc受体(FcRn),它结合内源性IgG,保护其免受溶酶体降解并再循环回血液循环(72)。然而,IgM不经历这一保护途径。用FcRn结合结构域(73-76)、白蛋白融合基序或脂质体包封或聚乙二醇化等保护方法工程化IgM已显示出延长其循环时间的潜力。

除抗体工程进展外,深入理解Fc受体(FcR)生物学对于优化基于IgM的治疗至关重要。FcRs是结合Ig Fc区域的免疫受体,在抗体效应功能中发挥核心作用(78)。虽然IgG主要通过Fcγ受体(FcγRs)发挥效应以介导细胞毒性和吞噬反应,但IgM主要与补体系统和FcμR相互作用。大量研究聚焦于FcγRs,其在免疫效应细胞(包括巨噬细胞、树突状细胞、NK细胞、中性粒细胞和B细胞)上表现出不同的表达模式,调节ADCC、吞噬作用和细胞因子产生(79)。激活型受体如FcγRI(CD64)、FcγRIIA(CD32A)和FcγRIIIA(CD16A)促进免疫激活,而抑制性FcγRIIB(CD32B)平衡这些信号以维持免疫稳态(80)。理解这种双向调节为基于IgM的治疗策略的合理设计提供了宝贵见解。FcμR特异性高亲和力结合五聚体或六聚体IgM的Fc区域,调节B细胞和T细胞反应并有助于免疫稳态(62)。然而,其在调节IgM介导的抗肿瘤免疫中的确切作用仍很大程度上未被探索,代表了基于IgM的治疗方法临床转化的关键前沿。

尽管IgM具有多价性和强结合亲和力,但其大分子量限制了向致密、富含基质肿瘤的穿透。此外,TME特征(如升高的间质液压力、缺氧和酸性pH)可能损害IgM的稳定性和活性(81, 82)。虽然IgM的强效补体激活可诱导肿瘤细胞裂解,但也可能放大促炎信号,从而加剧TME功能障碍(83)。未来研究需要更好地阐明IgM与TME之间的相互作用,这可能使肿瘤靶向策略更加精确。可生产性和稳定性代表了额外的障碍。IgM的结构复杂性使大规模生产变得复杂,并降低了制剂过程中的生物物理稳定性。

---

**表1 实体肿瘤中研究的治疗性IgM抗体汇总**

| 抗体 | 机构/公司 | 类型 | 靶点 | 作用机制 | 阶段/临床试验ID/适应症 | 参考文献 | |------|-----------|------|------|----------|----------------------|----------| | IGM-8444 (Aplitabart) | IGM Biosciences | 单特异性IgM | DR5 | DR5簇集;凋亡诱导;CDC | Ia/Ib期/(NCT04553692)/实体肿瘤 | (8) | | PAT-SM6 | Patrys Ltd. | 单特异性IgM | GRP78(及GRP78-LDL复合物) | 凋亡;脂凋亡;补体激活 | I期完成/(NCT01727778)/多发性骨髓瘤 | (42-46) | | SAM-6 | Patrys Ltd. | 单特异性IgM | 氧化LDL受体变体 | 脂质积累;脂凋亡 | 临床前/实体肿瘤 | (47, 48) | | AT101 | Centro Di Riferimento Oncologico (CRO) Di Aviano IRCCS | 单特异性IgM | GPC1 | CDC;肿瘤生长抑制 | 临床前/实体肿瘤 | (49, 50) | | IGM-2323 (Imvotamab) | IGM Biosciences | 双特异性IgM | CD20×CD3 | TDCC;低细胞因子释放 | I/II期/(NCT04082936)/B细胞恶性肿瘤 | (51, 52) | | IGM-2644 | IGM Biosciences | 双特异性IgM | CD38×CD3 | CDC;TDCC;低细胞因子释放 | I期/(NCT05908396)/多发性骨髓瘤 | (53) | | IGM-7354 | IGM Biosciences | 工程化IgM | PD-L1×IL-15 | NK/T细胞激活;IL-15刺激;抗肿瘤活性 | I期完成/(NCT05702424)/实体肿瘤 | (54) |

---

**图1 人免疫球蛋白同种型与IgM结构。** 五种主要免疫球蛋白类别的示意图。其中,IgM主要以五聚体形式分泌,具有十个抗原结合位点和高亲和力。右图描绘了IgM单体,突出显示了可变结构域(V_H、V_L)、恒定结构域(Cμ1-Cμ4、C_L)以及多聚化所必需的尾部片段。

**图2 IgM抗体形式的抗肿瘤机制。** (A) 单克隆IgM抗体主要通过强效激活经典补体途径介导肿瘤细胞裂解。(B) 双特异性IgM抗体同时结合肿瘤相关抗原和T细胞,从而促进细胞因子释放、免疫突触形成和肿瘤细胞毒性。(C) 工程化IgM抗体旨在克服免疫抑制(如靶向PD-1/PD-L1轴)并刺激效应免疫细胞(如T细胞和NK细胞)的增殖和激活,最终诱导肿瘤细胞死亡。

(9)令人鼓舞的是,相关领域的进展为IgM的开发带来了新的机遇。可开发性(developability)这一概念在IgG抗体的优化中一直发挥着关键作用(84–86),它同样可能有助于筛选出更优的IgM候选分子并简化药物开发流程。此外,计算技术的进步有望促进具有更优生物物理和药理学特性的IgM分子的发现(87)。通过优化表达宿主、应用糖工程(glycoengineering)以及采用基于机器学习的可开发性筛选,可显著提高IgM的产量和制剂稳定性。

抗体工程、表达系统和生物工艺优化方面的最新进展已开始着手解决这些局限性(58)。未来IgM疗法在实体瘤领域的成功将取决于抗体工程、转化生物学和临床开发方面的持续进展。随着对IgM生物学认识的不断深入以及创新分子形式的涌现,预计将有更完善的策略来克服当前面临的挑战,从而加速基于IgM的治疗方法向临床试验的转化,并最终为实体瘤患者带来新的希望。

资助:山东省自然科学基金项目ZR202111120048(朱文静)、ZR2022QH201(刘新林)和ZR2024MC119(刘新林);2022年市南区科技计划项目2023-2-015-YY(朱文静);基于机器视觉和眼动追踪技术的儿童眼科创新医疗器械研发项目24-1-5-yqpy-23-qy(朱文静);SnoRD14E-PBX3轴在调控肺腺癌进展中的作用及机制研究(82473113,朱文静);国家自然科学基金项目32300788(刘新林)。

利益冲突声明

作者声明,本研究是在不存在任何可能被解读为潜在利益冲突的商业或财务关系的情况下进行的。

生成式人工智能声明

作者声明,本论文的撰写未使用任何生成式人工智能。

本文中随图提供的任何替代文本(alt text)均由Frontiers在人工智能辅助下生成,并已尽合理努力确保其准确性,包括在可能的情况下经作者审核。如您发现任何问题,请联系我们。

作者贡献

YW:概念构思、初稿撰写、审阅与编辑。BW:指导、审阅与编辑。SL:审阅与编辑。YC:审阅与编辑。SZ:审阅与编辑。LB:审阅与编辑。WZ: