Preparation and Purification of Plasma Membranes From Murine Lymphoma Cells Carrying Tumour-Specific Antigenicity

Induction of immunity to chemically-induced rat tumours by cellular or soluble antigens

“…Subcellular fractions or solubilised preparations from chemically-induced rat tumours vary in their capacity to induce protection to tumour cell challenge in immunised recipients (Oettgen et al, 1968;Holmes et al, 1970;McCollester, 1970;Wolf and Avis, 1970;Baldwin et al, 1973b;Price and Baldwin, 1974a, b;Meltzer et al, 1972Meltzer et al, , 1975Pellis et al, 1974;P¢llis andKahan, 1975, 1976). In this laboratory, immunisation with cell-free fractions of carcinogen-induced rat neoplasms has resulted in the production of tumour-specific antibody demonstrable using membrane immunotluorescence techniques, but little evidence for the induction of beneficial tumour rejection responses has been noted (see Baldwin * Present address: Institut fiir Nuklearmedizin, Deutsches Krebsforsehungszentrum, D-6900, Heidelberg, Federal Republic of Germany Reprint requests should be addressed to: Dr. Michael R. Price and Price, 1975).…”

“…Also, in some studies with subcellular tumour fractions, the nature of the antigenic material itself has been considered to be important. For example, Wolf and Avis (1970) indicated that the size of plasma membrane fragments is critical for the induction of immunity to a carcinogen-induced murine lymphoma and the greatest protection to viable tumour cell challenge was produced by immunisation with almost intact cell 'ghosts' rather than fragmented surface membranes. This was not found to be the case with one aminoazodye-induced rat hepatoma, even though the membrane fractions isolated were shown to retain tumour-specific antigenic activity (Price and Baldwin, 1974b).…”

Immunogenic Properties of Rat Hepatoma Subcellular Fractions

“…The lack of immunoprotection by subcellular fractions in the rat hepatoma system contrasts with the resistance conferred by subcellular materials demonstrable with polycyclic hydrocarbon or alkylnitrosamine induced tumours in the mouse (Pilch, 1968;McCollester, 1970;Wolf and Avis, 1970) and guinea-pig (Oettgen et al, 1968;Holmes, Kahan and Morton, 1970;Meltzer et al, 1972). In these studies, membrane fractions (Pilch, 1968;McCollester, 1970;Wolf and Avis 1970) and solubilized membrane extracts (Pilcb, 1968;Holmes et al, 1970;Meltzer et al, 1972) as well as the soluble fraction of tumour homogenates (Oettgen et al, 1968) (Parish, 1971a, b;Shirrmacher and Wigzell, 1972;Thompson et al, 1972). However, in attempting a similar manipulation of the immune system, Levy et al (1974) observed that acetoacetylation of soluble tumour extracts did not increase the effectiveness of this material to protect mice against subsequent challenge with 3-methylcholanthrene induced sarcoma cells.…”

“…Although the membranes in these tests were isolated from the nuclear sediment (1000 g pellets) of hepatoma homogenates, purified nuclei lacked the capacity to induce humoral antibody formation and no significant protection to tumour cell challenge was observed in treated rats (Tables I and II). Wolf and Avis (1970) have indicated that the size of plasma membrane fragments is critical in the induction of immunity to a carcinogen induced murine lymphoma and greatest protection against viable tumour cell challenge was produced by immunization with almost intact cell ghost preparations rather than fragmented surface membranes. In order to investigate this, cell ghosts were prepared from single cell suspensions of hepatoma D23 according to the method of Warren et al (1966) using fluorescein mercuric acetate to stabilize the plasma membrane during cell disruption.…”

<i>In vitro </i>Assessment of Virus-Induced Tumor Immunity in the Adenovirus/ Hamster System

“…10 days after the last immunization, the immune response was tested by migration inhibition, using spleen cells in a direct capillary tube assay essentially as described by F alk and Z abriskie [3], except that phagocytic cells were not removed. Tumor anti gen and tumor cell membranes were prepared according to W olf and Avis [4], Table I shows that immunity was induced against virus antigen and TSTA, rather than against T antigen. Reactivity of virus-immunized hamsters against the TSTA implicates either transformation of host cells into tumor cells even in the adult animal and/or the appearance of TSTA during abortive cell infection [5].…”