1976
DOI: 10.1002/ajh.2830010409
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Effect of antiserum on transplantable hematopoietic colony‐forming units during rauscher leukemia development

Abstract: Studies have been carried out to determine the sensitivity of hematopoietic CFU-S from Rauscher leukemic mice to an antiserum against the disease prepared in syngeneic mice. Test of this antiserum against Rauscher virus prior to injection showed it to be effective both in vitro and in vivo. At the same time, normal serum was shown to be without effect either against the CFU-S or against the virus. Spleen CFU-S were obtained from control and leukemic mice over a sequence of days following Rauscher virus injecti… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

1978
1978
1980
1980

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These can be called into active cell cycle by a partial destruction of the stem cell pool, such as occurs with radiation, which is known to be a potentiating agent for murine viral leukemia (22,23). Regan Additional mechanisms could possibly be also proposed, but one of these, that of immunosuppression by MMS thereby reducing the animal's ability to destroy leukemogenic virus by antibody action (24,25), does not seem highly probable in view of the fact that the present data indicates that the immunosuppressive effect of MMS on antibody producing PFC does not coincide with the timing for the potentiating effect of the chemical.…”
Section: Thus Whatever Disruption Of Normal Cell Function Is Caused Bmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…These can be called into active cell cycle by a partial destruction of the stem cell pool, such as occurs with radiation, which is known to be a potentiating agent for murine viral leukemia (22,23). Regan Additional mechanisms could possibly be also proposed, but one of these, that of immunosuppression by MMS thereby reducing the animal's ability to destroy leukemogenic virus by antibody action (24,25), does not seem highly probable in view of the fact that the present data indicates that the immunosuppressive effect of MMS on antibody producing PFC does not coincide with the timing for the potentiating effect of the chemical.…”
Section: Thus Whatever Disruption Of Normal Cell Function Is Caused Bmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…The data of this paper gives positive evidence that enhancement of the humoral antibody plaque forming cell response can be demonstrated following leukemia virus infection. The significance of this lies in the fact that humoral antibody formation is known to play a role in the induction of immunity to leukemia virus in otherwise sensitive mice following the injection of killed virus and leukemia cells (15)(16)(17). For other strains, including the group to which the C57B1/10 belongs, it has also been established by in vitro studies that one control of resistance to infective oncorna virus rests directly at the level of the target cell, unmediated by immune response (18)(19)(20).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Too large a dose of virus, when given to the virus sensitive mice, results in 100% incidence of leukemta, with all of the test mice dying rapidly within 20 to 60 days, . Thus any possible potentiating effect of the chemical carcinogen would be obscured by the action of the virus alone.Conversely, too low a dose of virus results in a subthreshold response for leukemogenesis in which not only does no disease develop, but the animals may show an enhanced immune response to the leukemia antigen and possibly build an immunity against the leukemia(10,12,13). Therefere, due to the inherent difficulties in obtaining an exact titer for number of leukemogenically active virus particles, each potentiation experiment must be carefully controlled, and the response to chemical carcinogen plus virus compared each time…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%