ArticleOral oncology2024
Enhanced oral versus flank lymph node T cell response parallels anti-PD1 efficacy in head and neck cancer.
Article in Oral oncology, 2024. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Tumor implantation site dictates the immune landscape of syngeneic mouse models of head and neck cancer.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- The antitumor mechanism of immuno-flap treatment in a rat model of head and neck cancer.Cancer immunology, immunotherapy : CII · 2025Article
- Dendritic cell-based immunotherapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: advances and challenges.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Differential effects of small extracellular vesicles from head and neck cancer patients on dendritic cell functions.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesUnderstanding head and neck tissue specific immune responses is important for elucidating immunotherapy resistance mechanisms to head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC). In this study, we aimed to investigate HNSCC-specific immune response differences between oral and subcutaneous flank tumor transplantation in preclinical models. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe MOC1 syngeneic mouse oral carcinoma cell line or versions expressing either the H2Kb-restricted SIINFEKL peptide from ovalbumin (MOC1OVA) or ZsGreen (MOC1ZsGreen) were inoculated into mouse oral mucosa (buccal space) or subcutaneous flank and compared for immune cell kinetics in tumors and tumor-draining lymph nodes (TDLNs) and for anti-PD1 response.
resultsCompared to subcutaneous flank tumors, orthotopic oral MOC1OVA induced a higher number of OVA-specific T cells, PD1 + or CD69 + activated OVA-specific T cells in both primary tumors and TDLNs. Tumors were also larger in the flank site and CD8 depletion eliminated the difference in tumor weight between the two sites. Oral versus flank SIINFEKL peptide vaccination showed enhanced TDLN lymphocyte response in the former site. Notably, cDC1 from oral TDLN showed enhanced antigen uptake and co-stimulatory marker expression, resulting in elicitation of an increased antigen specific T cell response and increased activated T cells. Parental MOC1 in the oral site showed increased endogenous antigen-reactive T cells in TDLNs and anti-PD1 blockade rejected oral MOC1 tumors but not subcutaneous flank MOC1.
conclusionCollectively, we find distinct immune responses between orthotopic oral and heterotopic subcutaneous models, including priming by cDC1 in TDLN, revealing important implications for head and neck cancer preclinical studies.
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.