4.7 Article

Poly-ICLC promotes the infiltration of effector T cells into intracranial gliomas via induction of CXCL10 in IFN-α and IFN-γ dependent manners

期刊

CANCER IMMUNOLOGY IMMUNOTHERAPY
卷 59, 期 9, 页码 1401-1409

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00262-010-0876-3

关键词

CNS glioma; Poly-ICLC; Glioma vaccine; Type-1 immune response; Chemokine

资金

  1. Musella Foundation
  2. Pittsburgh Foundation
  3. National Institute of Health (NIH) [1R01NS055140, 1P01CA100327, 2P01NS40923, 1P01 CA132714]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Stimulation of double-stranded (ds)RNA receptors can increase the effectiveness of cancer vaccines, but the underlying mechanisms are not completely elucidated. In this study, we sought to determine critical roles of host IFN-alpha and IFN-gamma pathways in the enhanced therapeutic efficacy mediated by peptide vaccines and polyinosinic-polycytidylic acid [poly(I:C)] stabilized by lysine and carboxymethylcellulose (poly-ICLC) in the murine central nervous system (CNS) GL261 glioma. C57BL/6-background wild type (WT), IFN-alpha receptor-1 (IFN-alpha R1)(-/-) or IFN-gamma (-/-) mice bearing syngeneic CNS GL261 glioma received subcutaneous (s.c.) vaccinations with synthetic peptides encoding CTL epitopes with or without intramuscular (i.m.) injections of poly-ICLC. The combinational treatment induced a robust transcription of CXCL10 in the glioma site. Blockade of CXCL10 with a specific monoclonal antibody (mAb) abrogated the efficient CNS homing of antigen-specific type-1 CTL (Tc1). Both IFN-alpha R (-/-) and IFN-gamma (-/-) hosts failed to up-regulate the CXCL10 mRNA and recruit Tc1 cells to the tumor site, indicating non-redundant roles of type-1 and type-2 IFNs in the effects of poly-ICLC-assisted vaccines. The efficient trafficking of Tc1 also required Tc1-derived IFN-gamma. Our data point to critical roles of the host-IFN-alpha and IFN-gamma pathways in the modulation of CNS glioma microenvironment, and the therapeutic effectiveness of poly-ICLC-assisted glioma 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

4.7
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