Leo Kunz

Leo Kunz

Auto-generated profile, based on publicly available information

Leo Kunz

Department of Biosystems Science and Engineering, ETH Zurich, Basel, Switzerland

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

12Years (2015-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 September 2020 in Cell Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
CDCinzia Donato
Cinzia Donato
LKLeo Kunz
Leo Kunz
FCFrancesc Castro-Giner
Francesc Castro-Giner
APAino Paasinen-Sohns
Aino Paasinen-Sohns
KSKarin Strittmatter
Karin Strittmatter
NANicola Aceto
Nicola Aceto
Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) are shed from solid cancers in the form of single or clustered cells, and the latter display an extraordinary ability to initiate metastasis. Yet, the biological phenomena that trigger the shedding of CTC clusters from a primary cancerous lesion are poorly understood. Here, when dynamically labeling breast cancer cells along cancer progression, we observe that the majority of CTC clusters are undergoing hypoxia, while single CTCs are largely normoxic. Strikingly, we find that vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) targeting leads to primary tumor shrinkage, but it increases intra-tumor hypoxia, resulting in a higher CTC cluster shedding rate and metastasis formation. Conversely, pro-angiogenic treatment increases primary tumor size, yet it dramatically suppresses the formation of CTC clusters and metastasis. Thus, intra-tumor hypoxia leads to the formation of clustered CTCs with high metastatic ability, and a pro-angiogenic therapy suppresses metastasis formation through prevention of CTC cluster generation.

13 November 2017 in Nature Biotechnology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DCDaniel L Coutu
Daniel L Coutu
KKKonstantinos Kokkaliaris
Konstantinos Kokkaliaris
LKLeo Kunz
Leo Kunz
TSTimm Schroeder
Timm Schroeder

13 November 2017 in Nature Methods
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
DCDaniel L Coutu
Daniel L Coutu
KKKonstantinos Kokkaliaris
Konstantinos Kokkaliaris
LKLeo Kunz
Leo Kunz
TSTimm Schroeder
Timm Schroeder

12 November 2020 in Blood
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
KKKonstantinos Kokkaliaris
Konstantinos Kokkaliaris
LKLeo Kunz
Leo Kunz
NCNina Cabezas-Wallscheid
Nina Cabezas-Wallscheid
CCConstantina Christodoulou
Constantina Christodoulou
SRSimon Renders
Simon Renders
TSTimm Schroeder
Timm Schroeder
The exact localization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) in their native bone marrow (BM) microenvironment remains controversial, because multiple cell types have been reported to physically associate with HSCs. In this study, we comprehensively quantified HSC localization with up to 4 simultaneous (9 total) BM components in 152 full-bone sections from different bone types and 3 HSC reporter lines. We found adult femoral α-catulin-GFP+ or Mds1GFP/+Flt3Cre HSCs proximal to sinusoids, Cxcl12 stroma, megakaryocytes, and different combinations of those populations, but not proximal to bone, adipocyte, periarteriolar, or Schwann cells. Despite microanatomical differences in femurs and sterna, their adult α-catulin-GFP+ HSCs had similar distributions. Importantly, their microenvironmental localizations were not different from those of random dots, reflecting the relative abundance of imaged BM populations rather than active enrichment. Despite their functional heterogeneity, dormant label-retaining (LR) and non-LR hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells both had indistinguishable localization from α-catulin-GFP+ HSCs. In contrast, cycling juvenile BM HSCs preferentially located close to Cxcl12 stroma and farther from sinusoids/megakaryocytes. We expect our study to help resolve existing confusion regarding the exact localization of different HSC types, their physical association with described BM populations, and their tissue-wide combinations.

23 May 2024 in Blood
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
JSJohannes Sam
Johannes Sam
THThomas Hofer
Thomas Hofer
CKChristine Kuettel
Christine Kuettel
CCChristina Claus
Christina Claus
JTJenny Thom
Jenny Thom
PUPablo Umaña
Pablo Umaña
Effective T-cell responses not only require the engagement of T-cell receptors (TCRs; “signal 1”), but also the availability of costimulatory signals (“signal 2”). T-cell bispecific antibodies (TCBs) deliver a robust signal 1 by engaging the TCR signaling component CD3ε, while simultaneously binding to tumor antigens. The CD20-TCB glofitamab redirects T cells to CD20-expressing malignant B cells. Although glofitamab exhibits strong single-agent efficacy, adding costimulatory signaling may enhance the depth and durability of T-cell–mediated tumor cell killing. We developed a bispecific CD19-targeted CD28 agonist (CD19-CD28), RG6333, to enhance the efficacy of glofitamab and similar TCBs by delivering signal 2 to tumor-infiltrating T cells. CD19-CD28 distinguishes itself from the superagonistic antibody TGN1412, because its activity requires the simultaneous presence of a TCR signal and CD19 target binding. This is achieved through its engineered format incorporating a mutated Fc region with abolished FcγR and C1q binding, CD28 monovalency, and a moderate CD28 binding affinity. In combination with glofitamab, CD19-CD28 strongly increased T-cell effector functions in ex vivo assays using peripheral blood mononuclear cells and spleen samples derived from patients with lymphoma and enhanced glofitamab-mediated regression of aggressive lymphomas in humanized mice. Notably, the triple combination of glofitamab with CD19-CD28 with the costimulatory 4-1BB agonist, CD19–4-1BBL, offered substantially improved long-term tumor control over glofitamab monotherapy and respective duplet combinations. Our findings highlight CD19-CD28 as a safe and highly efficacious off-the-shelf combination partner for glofitamab, similar TCBs, and other costimulatory agonists. CD19-CD28 is currently in a phase 1 clinical trial in combination with glofitamab. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT05219513.

6 August 2015 in Frontiers in Physiology
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
TKTim Kleiber
Tim Kleiber
LKLeo Kunz
Leo Kunz
Catherine Disselhorst-KlugCatherine Disselhorst-Klug
Catherine Disselhorst-Klug
Contribution of synergistic muscles towards specific movements over multi joint systems may change with varying position of distal or proximal joints. Purpose of this study is to reveal the relationship of muscular coordination of brachioradialis and biceps brachii during elbow flexion with respect to hand position and biomechanical advantages and disadvantages of biceps brachii. A group of 16 healthy subjects has been advised to perform 20 repetitions of single elbow flexion movements in different hand positions (pronated, neutral and supinated). With a speed of 20°/s, simultaneously sEMG of biceps brachii and brachioradialis and kinematics of the movement were recorded in a motion analysis laboratory. Normalized to MVC the sEMG amplitudes of both muscles contributing to elbow flexion movements were compared in pronated, supinated and neutral hand position over elbow joint angle. Significant differences in the contribution of brachioradialis were found in pronated hand position compared to supinated and neutral hand position while the muscular activity of biceps brachii shows no significant changes in any hand position. In conclusion, a statistical significant dependency of the inter-muscular coordination between biceps brachii and brachioradialis during elbow flexion with respect to hand position has been observed depending on a biomechanical disadvantage of biceps brachii.