| Title |
Transcatheter arterial embolization combined with radiofrequency ablation activates CD8+ T-cell infiltration surrounding residual tumors in the rabbit VX2 liver tumors
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s95973 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xu-Hua Duan, Teng-Fei Li, Guo-Feng Zhou, Xin-Wei Han, Chuan-Sheng Zheng, Peng-fei Chen, Gan-Sheng Feng |
| Abstract |
To evaluate the effect of transcatheter arterial embolization (TAE) combined with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) treatment (TAE + RFA) on the expression of heat shock protein 70 (HSP70) in residual tumors and explore the relationship between the HSP70 and CD8(+) T-cell infiltrate surrounding residual tumors in the rabbit VX2 liver tumor model. Animals with VX2 liver tumors were randomized into four groups (control, TAE, RFA, and TAE + RFA) with 15 rabbits in each group. Five rabbits in each group were sacrificed on days 1, 3, and 7 after treatment. HSP70 expression and infiltration of CD8(+) T-cells in the liver and residual tumors surrounding the necrosis zone were detected by immunohistochemistry staining. The maximal diameters of tumor necrosis, numbers of metastases, and tumor growth rate were compared on day 7 after treatment. TAE + RFA achieved larger maximal diameter of tumor necrosis, lower tumor growth rate, and fewer metastatic lesions, compared with other treatments on day 7. The number of CD8(+) T-cells in the TAE + RFA group was significantly higher than in other groups on days 1, 3, and 7. There was a positive correlation between HSP70 expression level and infiltration of CD8(+) T-cells surrounding the residual tumor on day 1 (r=0.9782, P=0.012), day 3 (r=0.93, P=0.021), and day 7 (r=0.8934, P=0.034). In the rabbit VX2 liver tumor model, TAE + RFA activated the highest number of CD8(+) T-cells surrounding residual tumors. TAE + RFA appears to be a beneficial therapeutic modality for tumor control and antitumor immune response in this model. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 6 | 29% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 1 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 29% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 10 | 48% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 January 2018.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#2,078
of 3,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#269,274
of 311,862 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#78
of 123 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,016 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 311,862 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 123 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.