4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

DNA vaccines, electroporation and their applications in cancer treatment

期刊

HUMAN VACCINES & IMMUNOTHERAPEUTICS
卷 11, 期 8, 页码 1889-1900

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2015.1035502

关键词

DNA vaccine; cancer; anti-tumor immunity; tumor immune evasion

资金

  1. Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Ministry of Education, Science and Technology [2012R1A1A2038430]
  2. National Research Foundation of Korea [2012R1A1A2038430] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Numerous animal studies and recent clinical studies have shown that electroporation-delivered DNA vaccines can elicit robust Ag-specific CTL responses and reduce disease severity. However, cancer antigens are generally poorly immunogenic, requiring special conditions for immune response induction. To date, many different approaches have been used to elicit Ag-specific CTL and anti-neoplastic responses to DNA vaccines against cancer. In vivo electroporation is one example, whereas others include DNA manipulation, xenogeneic antigen use, immune stimulatory molecule and immune response regulator application, DNA prime-boost immunization strategy use and different DNA delivery methods. These strategies likely increase the immunogenicity of cancer DNA vaccines, thereby contributing to cancer eradication. However, cancer cells are heterogeneous and might become CTL-resistant. Thus, understanding the CTL resistance mechanism(s) employed by cancer cells is critical to develop counter-measures for this immune escape. In this review, the use of electroporation as a DNA delivery method, the strategies used to enhance the immune responses, the cancer antigens that have been tested, and the escape mechanism(s) used by tumor cells are discussed, with a focus on the progress of clinical trials using cancer DNA vaccines.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据