4.6 Article

Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Evaluate Dendritic Cell-Based Vaccination

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065318

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. New Zealand Ministry of Science and Innovation [PROJ-13733-NMTS]
  2. New Zealand Health Research Council
  3. Wellington Medical Research Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cancer immunotherapy with antigen-loaded dendritic cell-based vaccines can induce clinical responses in some patients, but further optimization is required to unlock the full potential of this strategy in the clinic. Optimization is dependent on being able to monitor the cellular events that take place once the dendritic cells have been injected in vivo, and to establish whether antigen-specific immune responses to the tumour have been induced. Here we describe the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as a simple, non-invasive approach to evaluate vaccine success. By loading the dendritic cells with highly magnetic iron nanoparticles it is possible to assess whether the injected cells drain to the lymph nodes. It is also possible to establish whether an antigen-specific response is initiated by assessing migration of successive rounds of antigen-loaded dendritic cells; in the face of a successfully primed cytotoxic response, the bulk of antigen-loaded cells are eradicated on-route to the node, whereas cells without antigen can reach the node unchecked. It is also possible to verify the induction of a vaccine-induced response by simply monitoring increases in draining lymph node size as a consequence of vaccine-induced lymphocyte trapping, which is an antigen-specific response that becomes more pronounced with repeated vaccination. Overall, these MRI techniques can provide useful early feedback on vaccination strategies, and could also be used in decision making to select responders from non-responders early in therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available