ArticleTransplant immunology2015
In vitro testing of an anti-CD40 monoclonal antibody, clone 2C10, in primates and pigs.
Article in Transplant immunology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of primate anti-pig xenoreactive immune responses using immortalized aortic endothelial cells from genetically modified pigs.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Anti-CD40 antibody-mediated costimulation blockade promotes long-term survival of deep-lamellar porcine corneal grafts in non-human primates.Xenotransplantation · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe CD40/CD154 and CD28/B7 pathways are important in allo- and xeno-transplantation. Owing to the thrombotic complications of anti-CD154mAb, anti-CD40mAb has emerged as a promising inhibitor of costimulation. Various clones of anti-CD40mAb have been developed against primate species, e.g., clone 2C10 against rhesus monkeys. We have compared the in vitro efficacy of 2C10 to prevent a T cell response in primates and pigs.
methodsThe binding of 2C10 to antigen-presenting cells (PBMCs [B cells]) of humans, rhesus and cynomolgus monkeys, baboons, and pigs was measured by flow cytometry, and was also tested indirectly by a blocking assay. The functional capacity of 2C10 was tested by mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) with polyclonal stimulation by phytohemagglutinin (PHA) and also with wild-type pig aortic endothelial cells (pAECs) as stimulators.
resultsThere was a significant reduction in binding of 2C10 to baboon PBMCs compared to rhesus, cynomolgus, and human PBMCs, and minimal binding to pig PBMCs. The blocking assay confirmed that the binding of 2C10 was significantly lower to baboon PBMCs when compared to the other primate species tested. The functional assay with PHA showed significantly reduced inhibition of PBMC proliferation in humans, cynomolgus monkeys, and baboons compared to rhesus monkeys, which was confirmed on MLR with pAECs.
conclusionsSince both the binding and functional activity of 2C10 in the baboon is lower than in rhesus monkeys, in vivo treatment using 2C10 in the baboon might require a higher dose or more frequent administration in comparison to rhesus monkeys. It may also be beneficial to develop species-specific clones of anti-CD40mAb.
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.