ArticleJournal of immunology research2015
Intradermal DNA Electroporation Induces Cellular and Humoral Immune Response and Confers Protection against HER2/neu Tumor.
Article in Journal of immunology research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Nucleic Acid-Based Approaches for Tumor Therapy.Cells · 2020Review
- Stable Immune Response Induced by Intradermal DNA Vaccination by a Novel Needleless Pyro-Drive Jet Injector.AAPS PharmSciTech · 2019Article
- Safe and efficient novel approach for non-invasive gene electrotransfer to skin.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- DNA Vaccines-How Far From Clinical Use?International journal of molecular sciences · 2018Review
- Clinical applications of mouse models for breast cancer engaging HER2/neu.Integrative cancer science and therapeutics · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Skin represents an attractive target for DNA vaccine delivery because of its natural richness in APCs, whose targeting may potentiate the effect of vaccination. Nevertheless, intramuscular electroporation is the most common delivery method for ECTM vaccination. In this study we assessed whether intradermal administration could deliver the vaccine into different cell types and we analyzed the evolution of tissue infiltrate elicited by the vaccination protocol. Intradermal electroporation (EP) vaccination resulted in transfection of different skin layers, as well as mononuclear cells. Additionally, we observed a marked recruitment of reactive infiltrates mainly 6-24 hours after treatment and inflammatory cells included CD11c(+). Moreover, we tested the efficacy of intradermal vaccination against Her2/neu antigen in cellular and humoral response induction and consequent protection from a Her2/neu tumor challenge in Her2/neu nontolerant and tolerant mice. A significant delay in transplantable tumor onset was observed in both BALB/c (p ≤ 0,0003) and BALB-neuT mice (p = 0,003). Moreover, BALB-neuT mice displayed slow tumor growth as compared to control group (p < 0,0016). In addition, while in vivo cytotoxic response was observed only in BALB/c mice, a significant antibody response was achieved in both mouse models. Our results identify intradermal EP vaccination as a promising method for delivering Her2/neu DNA vaccine.
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.