1978
DOI: 10.1016/0014-2964(78)90103-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Failure of neuraminidase treatment to influence tumorigenicity or immunogenicity of syngeneically transplanted rat tumour cells

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1978
1978
1982
1982

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Spence et al (1978) were recently unable to show tumor regression or prolongation of survival in mice immunized with a vaccine consisting of neuraminidase-treated MC-80 fibrosarcoma cells. Pimm and Cook (1978), examining the growth of a number of tumors, showed that neuraminidase treatment had no effect on the tumorigenicity or immunogenicity of the tumor cells tested. Killion (1977), in a study on the immunotherapy of L1210 leukemia with an L1210 tumor cell subpopulation, showed that the immunotherapeutic value of this subpopulation was abrogated by treatment of the cells with neuraminidase.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Spence et al (1978) were recently unable to show tumor regression or prolongation of survival in mice immunized with a vaccine consisting of neuraminidase-treated MC-80 fibrosarcoma cells. Pimm and Cook (1978), examining the growth of a number of tumors, showed that neuraminidase treatment had no effect on the tumorigenicity or immunogenicity of the tumor cells tested. Killion (1977), in a study on the immunotherapy of L1210 leukemia with an L1210 tumor cell subpopulation, showed that the immunotherapeutic value of this subpopulation was abrogated by treatment of the cells with neuraminidase.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The therapeutic success of this treatment was claimed to depend on the following conditions: (1) Tumor cells used for vaccination had to be identical in type or in antigenic specificity with the growing tumor (Simmons et al, 1971d;Bekesi et al, 1971Bekesi et al, , 1976, since nonidentical tumor cells were ineffective; (2) The VCN used had to be enzymatically active; injection of tumor cells treated with heat-inactivated VCN or with VCN inhibited by a high concentration of N-acetyl neuraminic acid (NeuAc) or neuraminyllactose did not impair tumor development Bekesi et al, 1972); (3) The tumor mass in the animal had to be as small as possible. Thus, in the tumor models investigated, tumors greater in diameter than 1 cm Simmons et al, 1971;Rios and Simmons, 1972, 1973Ray et al, 1976;Wilson et al, 1974Alley and Snodgrass, 1977Rios and Simmons, 1973Alley and Snodgrass, 1977Miller et al, 1976Egeberg and Jensen, 1974Bekesi et al, 1971LeFever et al, 1976;Killion, 1977Simmons and Rios, 1973Bekesi et al, 1975Sedlacek et al, 1975 Spence et al, 1978;Wilson et al, 1974a Pimm et al, 1978Albright et al, 1975Ghose et al, 1977Jamieson, 1974Froese et al, 1974a Pimm et al, 1978Porwit-Bobr et al, 1974Killion, 1977" Borinskii and Kobrinskii, 1977Math~ et al, 1973Dor6 et al, 1973 a Enhancement of tumor growth after injection of VCN-treated cells tumor immunotherapy with VCN-treated tumor cells; (4) Tumor-bearing animals had to be immunocompetent. Reduction of the tumor mass by surgery , chemotherapy (Bekesi et al, 1974)…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%