4.4 Article

Characterization of Immune Cell Infiltration Into Canine Intracranial Meningiomas

Journal

VETERINARY PATHOLOGY
Volume 49, Issue 5, Pages 784-795

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0300985811417249

Keywords

brain; dog; immunohistochemistry; lymphocyte; meningioma; microglia; Toll-like receptor; tumor

Funding

  1. Merck-Merial Veterinary Scholars Program
  2. American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine Foundation
  3. Department of Clinical Sciences, North Carolina State University College of Veterinary Medicine

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Meningiomas are the most common intracranial tumors in dogs. A variety of inflammatory cells have been shown to invade these tumors in people, but little is known about interactions between the immune system and naturally occurring brain tumors in dogs. The purpose of this study was to investigate the presence of a variety of immune cell subsets within canine intracranial meningiomas. Twenty-three formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tumor samples were evaluated using immunohistochemistry with antibodies specific for CD3, CD79a, CD18, CD11d (alpha D), CD45RA, forkhead box P3, and Toll-like receptors 4 and 9. Immune cell infiltration was evident in all samples, with a predominance of CD3(+) T cells. Large numbers of CD18(+) microglia and macrophages were noted surrounding and infiltrating the tumors, and a subset of these cells within the tumor appeared to be CD11d(+). Scattered macrophages at the tumor-brain interface were TLR4(+) and TLR9(+). Rare CD79a(+) B cells were noted in only a small subset of tumors. Lesser numbers of lymphocytes that were CD11d(+), CD45RA(+), or FoxP3(+) were noted in a number of the meningiomas. Although the function of these cells is not yet clear, work in other species suggests that evaluation of this immune cell infiltrate may provide important prognostic information and may be useful in the design of novel therapies.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available