ArticleTransplantation2017
Underlying Mechanisms of Protection Involved in Immunocloak.
Article in Transplantation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unlocking Transplant Tolerance with Biomaterials.Advanced healthcare materials · 2025Review
- The Application of Nanoparticles in Diagnosis and Treatment of Kidney Diseases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Organ preservation with targeted rapamycin nanoparticles: a pre-treatment strategy preventing chronic rejectionRSC advances · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWe have previously reported on a novel organ-specific immunomodifying therapy that provides protection from early allograft rejection in the absence of systemic immunosuppressive drugs. This novel therapy is a nanobarrier membrane called ImmunoCloak, consisting of a matrix of laminin, proteoglycans, fibronectin, and collagens. The membrane "immunocloaks" the luminal surfaces within the renal vasculature by covering the point of contact between donor vascular endothelial cells and the recipient's immune cells, without adversely affecting renal function. The resulting nonthrombogenic and nonimmunogenic apical surface significantly delays the onset of rejection fivefold over untreated controls. Currently, our focus is to elucidate the mechanisms of protection provided by placement of the membrane.
methodsThe mechanisms underlying the protective effect of the ImmunoCloak treatment was evaluated using human peripheral blood mononuclear cells and by testing for antigen presentation by cytokine/chemokine analysis using the Luminex platform, T cell allogeneic responses were measured by flow cytometry, and diapedesis was assessed using transwell plates.
resultsWe now report that ImmunoCloak interrupts antigen presentation thereby preventing early T cell activation and interferes with diapedesis. There was significant inhibition in the synthesis of proinflammatory cytokines with a concordant blockade of T cell-mediated responses. The placement of the ImmunoCloak also significantly reduced leukocyte migration through the endothelial cell layer by 93%.
conclusionsEliminating the need for nephrotoxic immunosuppressive drugs during the early posttransplant period could help to ameliorate the severity of delayed graft function and could provide a path to using more ischemically damaged renal allografts.
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.