4.6 Article

Sub-lethal radiation enhances anti-tumor immunotherapy in a transgenic mouse model of pancreatic cancer

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 2, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BIOMED CENTRAL LTD
DOI: 10.1186/1471-2407-2-11

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: It is not uncommon to observe circulating tumor antigen-specific T lymphocytes in cancer patients despite a lack of significant infiltration and destruction of their tumors. Thus, an important goal for tumor immunotherapy is to identify ways to modulate in vivo anti-tumor immunity to achieve clinical efficacy. We investigate this proposition in a spontaneous mouse tumor model, Rip1-Tag2. Methods: Experimental therapies were carried out in two distinctive trial designs, intended to either intervene in the explosive growth of small tumors, or regress bulky end-stage tumors. Rip1-Tag2 mice received a single transfer of splenocytes from Tag- specific, CD4(+) T cell receptor transgenic mice, a single sub-lethal radiation, or a combination therapy in which the lymphocyte transfer was preceded by the sub-lethal radiation. Tumor burden, the extent of lymphocyte infiltration into solid tumors and host survival were used to assess the efficacy of these therapeutic approaches. Results: In either intervention or regression, the transfer of Tag- specific T cells alone did not result in significant lymphocyte infiltration into solid tumors, not did it affect tumor growth or host survival. In contrast, the combination therapy resulted in significant reduction in tumor burden, increase in lymphocyte infiltration into solid tumors, and extension of survival. Conclusions: The results indicate that certain types of solid tumors may be intrinsically resistant to infiltration and destruction by tumor-specific T lymphocytes. Our data suggest that such resistance can be disrupted by sub-lethal radiation. The combinatorial approach presented here merits consideration in the design of clinical trials aimed to achieve T cell-mediated anti-tumor immunity.

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

4.6
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