ArticleMolecular medicine reports2017
Comparative investigation of the effects of specific antigen‑sensitized DC‑CIK and DC‑CTL cells against B16 melanoma tumor cells.
Article in Molecular medicine reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Autologous CIK cells combined with chemotherapy as the first-line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic gastric cancer is safe and feasible.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Trial
- Cancer-testis antigen ACRBP: Cytotoxic response to its HLA-A2 restricted peptide and immune features in ovarian cancer.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Article
- Prediction and identification of HLA-A*0201-restricted epitopes from cancer testis antigen CT23.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2023Article
- Safety of dendritic cell and cytokine-induced killer (DC-CIK) cell-based immunotherapy in patients with solid tumor: a retrospective study in China.American journal of cancer research · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of personalized adoptive immunotherapy as a potential novel approach is promising in the treatment of tumors resistant to conventional therapies. In the present study, dendritic cell (DC)‑cytokine‑induced killer (CIK) and DC‑cytotoxic lymphocyte (CTL) cells were cultured to examine their phenotype, proliferation and cytotoxicity against B16 melanoma tumor cells. In addition, comparative investigations of the effect of specific antigen‑sensitized DC‑CIK and DC‑CTL cells against B16 melanoma tumor cells were performed in vitro and in vivo. The results showed that the phenotypes of the co‑cultured cells were altered, and DCs promoted DC‑CIK cell and DC‑CTL cell differentiation and maturation in vitro. Lactate dehydrogenase cytotoxic analysis indicated that the cytotoxicity increased as the effector to target ratio increased between 10:1 and 40:1, and the cytotoxic effect towards B16 melanoma cells by DC‑CTL cells was significantly higher, compared with that of DC‑CIK cells. To further examine the antineoplastic efficacy of DC‑CIK and DC‑CTL cells in vivo, the present study performed tail‑intravenous injection of DC‑CIK cells and DC‑CTL cells, which attenuated B16 melanoma cell‑engrafted tumor growth, induced G0/G1 cell cycle arrest and accelerated cell apoptosis. Taken together, these results suggested that the use of DC‑CTL or DC‑CIK cell therapy as a personalized adoptive immunotherapy may regulate immune status and inhibit tumor growth in vivo. In addition, the experiments indicated that DC‑CTL cells offer superior antineoplastic activity, compared with DC‑CIK cells against B16 melanoma tumor cells.
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.