1996
DOI: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1996.tb21147.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Breaking of Oral Tolerance by an Encapsulated Antigen

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

1996
1996
2011
2011

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One way to confirm a causative link between gut immunity and our ability to transplant E28 pig pancreatic primordia and porcine islets in non-immune-suppressed hosts would be to “break” the established oral tolerance [38], using glucose control as a readout in the rat mode, theoretically possible so long as extrathymic deletion of antigen-reactive T cells [35] has not occurred. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One way to confirm a causative link between gut immunity and our ability to transplant E28 pig pancreatic primordia and porcine islets in non-immune-suppressed hosts would be to “break” the established oral tolerance [38], using glucose control as a readout in the rat mode, theoretically possible so long as extrathymic deletion of antigen-reactive T cells [35] has not occurred. …”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently developed techniques of antigen delivery in the gastrointestinal tract by coupling with cholera toxin B subunit or micro-encapsulation (20) are potentially able to modify this situation.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Studies have demonstrated that mice fed encapsulated protein had greater capacity to suppress specific serum IgG than soluble protein, but if the encapsulated dose was too high, oral tolerance was broken and a strong, Th2 cell response was activated. 24,25 In 2000, Pecquet et al 26 demonstrated that the oral administration of PLGA microspheres loaded with beta-lactoglobulin were able to induce oral tolerance in mice at a dose 10,000 times less than required with soluble antigen.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%