HonCode

Go Back   HER2 Support Group Forums > Articles of Interest
Register Gallery FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-27-2006, 02:38 PM   #1
Lani
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,778
any of you actively in the Seattle vaccine trial

I wonder what Dr. Disis et al think of this:

Clinical Cancer Research Vol. 12, 3435-3443, June 1, 2006
© 2006 American Association for Cancer Research
Cancer Therapy: Preclinical

CIITA-Induced MHC Class II Expression in Mammary Adenocarcinoma Leads to a Th1 Polarization of the Tumor Microenvironment, Tumor Rejection, and Specific Antitumor Memory

Lorenzo Mortara1, Patrizia Castellani2, Raffaella Meazza4, Giovanna Tosi1, Andrea De Lerma Barbaro1, Francesco A. Procopio1, Alberto Comes3, Luciano Zardi4,5, Silvano Ferrini3 and Roberto S. Accolla1
Authors' Affiliations: 1 Department of Clinical and Biological Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy; 2 Laboratory of Cellular Biology and 3 Laboratory of Immunological Therapy, Istituto Nazionale per la Ricerca sul Cancro; 4 Laboratory of Experimental and Clinical Immunology, Istituto G. Gaslini; and 5 Unit of Innovative Therapy, Advanced Biotechnology Center, Genova, Italy

Requests for reprints: Roberto S. Accolla, Department of Clinical and Biological Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Insubria, Via Ottorino Rossi, 9, 21100 Varese, Italy: Phone: 39-348-3034698; Fax: 39-0332-217219; E-mail: roberto.accolla@uninsubria.it.

Purpose: We have shown previously that the MHC class II–negative murine TS/A adenocarcinoma is rejected in vivo if induced to express MHC class II molecules by transfection of the MHC class II transactivator CIITA. In this study, we explored the immunologic basis of tumor rejection and the correlation between histopathology of tumor tissue and immune rejection.

Experimental Design: Stable TS/A-CIITA transfectants were generated and injected into mice. In vivo cell depletion, immunohistochemistry of tumor tissues, and immune functional assays were done to assess the cellular and immunologic basis of rejection.

Results: Ninety-two percent of mice injected with TS/A-CIITA rejected the tumor and were completely resistant to challenge with parental TS/A. Only CD4+ and CD8+ cells were required for rejection. The tumor microenvironment in TS/A-CIITA-injected mice changed dramatically when compared with the TS/A parental-injected mice. Rapid infiltration with CD4+ T cells followed by dendritic cells, CD8+ T cells, and granulocytes was observed. Importantly, TS/A-CIITA cells could act as antigen-presenting cells because they process and present nominal antigens to CD4+ T cells. Tumor-specific CD4+ T cells of TS/A-CIITA-injected mice had the functional characteristics of Th1 cells and produced IFN- and this was relevant for generation and maintenance of protective antitumor response, because IFN- knockout mice were no longer rejecting TS/A-CIITA tumor cells.

Conclusion: CIITA-dependent MHC class II expression confers to TS/A tumor cells the capacity to act as a protective vaccine against the tumor by triggering tumor antigen presentation to T helper cells, antitumor polarization of cellular and soluble components of the tumor microenvironment, and establishment of antitumor immune memory.
Lani is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2006, 05:26 PM   #2
alw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 63
Lani - Could you please clarify?

I'm sorry - Lani, but this one may be a little over my head. I have read quite a bit about the U of W Vaccine trials - but what is the relationship here (ie why would you say that you wonder what Dr Nora Disis would think about this)? Something about the CD4+ and CD8+ cells?

Thank you so much for all of your input on this board.

Regards,

Amy
alw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2006, 12:46 AM   #3
Lani
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,778
explanation

I only selected the group in Seattle as they are so active, trying so many types of vaccines , They seem to always be considering trying more different types. Review articles on the effectiveness of vaccines are usually disappointing, as we really don't know enough about how the immune system works to know how to best activate it in a useful (and not harmful--ie, over stimulating it against self-proteins such as autoimmune diseases) way.

This seemed to be an especially effective vaccine type with 92% and 100% of mice unable to form tumors in response to injected tumor cells.

I know most of the Seattle group's vaccines have NOT been for those with Early breast cancer (I think the Windber/Walter Reed group is the only one with such a vaccine), but I know they seem to be always adding new or different vaccines to their repetoire.

Thanks for your response.

Lani
Lani is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright HER2 Support Group 2007 - 2021
free webpage hit counter