ArticleClinical and experimental immunology2002
Feeding NOD mice with pig splenocytes induces transferable mechanisms that modulate cellular and humoral xenogeneic reactions against pig spleen or islet cells.
Article in Clinical and experimental immunology, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We have reported previously that oral administration of pig cells to NOD mice modified xenogeneic cellular response against pig islet cells (PICs), and hypothesized that it may have induced active suppression. This preliminary report evaluated only the effect of feeding pig cells by 'primary' proliferation, i.e. when splenocytes from fed mice are confronted with pig cells in vitro. The present study also considered 'secondary' proliferation and cytokine production after feeding and subsequent in vivo graft of pig cells. Additionally, serum IgM and IgG isotypes were quantified by ELISA using pig target cells. Induction of active mechanism by feeding was hypothetical, which led us here to transfer splenocytes from mice fed pig spleen cells (PSC) and evaluate 'primary' (after transfer) and 'secondary' (after transfer and subsequent graft of pig cells) proliferations and cytokine secretions in recipient mice. We also determined whether the effects of feeding pig cells persisted after depression of suppressor mechanisms by cyclophosphamide. Mice fed with PSC displayed increased 'primary' splenocyte proliferation to PSC or PIC (P < 0.0001), while 'secondary' responses were decreased (P < 0.03) in those fed PSC and subsequently grafted with PSC. The increased 'primary' and decreased 'secondary' proliferations were reduced (P < 0.04) by pretreatment with cyclophosphamide. The IL-10/ and IL-4/IFNgamma ratios produced in response to PSC increased (P < 0.04) in mice fed and grafted with PSC compared to those grafted only with PSC. IgM and IgG levels against pig cells were, respectively, increased (P < 0.04) and decreased (P < 0.04) in mice fed and grafted with PSC. IgG2a and IgG2b, but not IgG1, levels were lower (P < 0.01). These effects of feeding PSC on 'secondary' proliferation, cytokine and antibody productions, were not detected when mice were fed PSC only after graft with PSC. Transfer with splenocytes from mice fed PSC increased 'primary' proliferation of splenocytes from recipient mice in response to PSC (P < 0.02) or PIC (P < 0.05). After transfer with splenocytes from PSC-fed mice and graft with PSC, 'secondary' proliferation to pig cells were reduced (P < 0.04), and the IL-10/IFNgamma ratio produced in response to PSC was increased fourfold. Thus, oral administration of PSC induces active transferable mechanisms, characterized by a biphasic pattern with early increased 'primary' xenogeneic cellular reactions to both PSC and PIC, followed by decreased 'secondary' responsiveness and a concomitant shift of the Th1/Th2 balance towards greater Th2 influence. Decreased responsiveness may be due to active suppression, even though induction of anergy or deletion cannot be excluded.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.