Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26442104›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in genetics2015

Establishing the pig as a large animal model for vaccine development against human cancer.

Nana H Overgaard, Thomas M Frøsig, Simon Welner, Michael Rasmussen, Mette Ilsøe, Maria R Sørensen, Mads H Andersen, Søren Buus, Gregers Jungersen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Pigs: Large Animal Preclinical Cancer Models.World journal of oncology · 2024
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Transarterial Embolization of Liver Cancer in a Transgenic Pig Model.Journal of vascular and interventional radiology : JVIR · 2021
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Vaccine adjuvant activity of emulsified oils from species of the Pinaceae family.Phytomedicine : international journal of phytotherapy and phytopharmacology · 2019
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nana H OvergaardDepartment of Immunology and Vaccinology, National Veterinary Institute, Technical University of Denmark Copenhagen, Denmark.
Thomas M FrøsigDepartment of Immunology and Vaccinology, National Veterinary Institute, Technical University of Denmark Copenhagen, Denmark.
Simon WelnerDepartment of Immunology and Vaccinology, National Veterinary Institute, Technical University of Denmark Copenhagen, Denmark.
Michael RasmussenDepartment of International Health, Immunology and Microbiology, University of Copenhagen Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mette IlsøeDepartment of Immunology and Vaccinology, National Veterinary Institute, Technical University of Denmark Copenhagen, Denmark.
Maria R SørensenDepartment of Immunology and Vaccinology, National Veterinary Institute, Technical University of Denmark Copenhagen, Denmark.
Mads H AndersenCenter for Cancer Immune Therapy, Department of Hematology, Copenhagen University Hospital Herlev, Denmark.
Søren BuusDepartment of International Health, Immunology and Microbiology, University of Copenhagen Copenhagen, Denmark.
Gregers JungersenDepartment of Immunology and Vaccinology, National Veterinary Institute, Technical University of Denmark Copenhagen, Denmark.
Technical University of Denmark · DKUniversity of Copenhagen · DKHerlev Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Immunotherapy has increased overall survival of metastatic cancer patients, and cancer antigens are promising vaccine targets. To fulfill the promise, appropriate tailoring of the vaccine formulations to mount in vivo cytotoxic T cell (CTL) responses toward co-delivered cancer antigens is essential. Previous development of therapeutic cancer vaccines has largely been based on studies in mice, and the majority of these candidate vaccines failed to induce therapeutic responses in the subsequent human clinical trials. Given that antigen dose and vaccine volume in pigs are translatable to humans and the porcine immunome is closer related to the human counterpart, we here introduce pigs as a supplementary large animal model for human cancer vaccine development. IDO and RhoC, both important in human cancer development and progression, were used as vaccine targets and 12 pigs were immunized with overlapping 20mer peptides spanning the entire porcine IDO and RhoC sequences formulated in CTL-inducing adjuvants: CAF09, CASAC, Montanide ISA 51 VG, or PBS. Taking advantage of recombinant swine MHC class I molecules (SLAs), the peptide-SLA complex stability was measured for 198 IDO- or RhoC-derived 9-11mer peptides predicted to bind to SLA-1(*)04:01, -1(*)07:02, -2(*)04:01, -2(*)05:02, and/or -3(*)04:01. This identified 89 stable (t½ ≥ 0.5 h) peptide-SLA complexes. By IFN-γ release in PBMC cultures we monitored the vaccine-induced peptide-specific CTL responses, and found responses to both IDO- and RhoC-derived peptides across all groups with no adjuvant being superior. These findings support the further use of pigs as a large animal model for vaccine development against human cancer.

Indexed as

adjuvantsanimal modelcancer vaccinescytotoxic T cellsimmune therapyimmunologicpeptide-MHC stability

Identifiers

PMID26442104
PMCPMC4584933
OpenAlexW2147229823

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.