1,720,977 research outputs found

    The immunogenicity of experimental tumors is strongly biased by the expression of dominant viral cytotoxic T-lymphocyte epitopes

    No full text
    The immunogenic Friend-Moloney-Rauscher (FMR) virus-induced tumors have been used extensively to clarify the cellular and molecular mechanisms responsible for tumor rejection and to develop immunotherapeutic strategies. We characterize here the trimolecular complex MHC class I-antigenic determinant-T cell receptor involved in the induction of a protective CTL response against the RMA thymoma. This complex is mainly composed by the D(b) molecule interacting with a Rauscher virus antigen (Ag) determinant and the Vbeta5+ T cell receptor. We also show that the chemically induced EL-4 thymoma acquires the susceptibility to recognition by anti-RMA CTLs and the ability to elicit a protective anti-RMA CTL response only upon infection by a virus of the FMR family and that RMA and FMR virus infected EL-4 cells share tumor-associated Ag. The data strongly support the hypothesis that the high immunogenicity of virus-induced or infected tumors is determined by the expression of immunodominant virus-encoded Ag. The demonstration of a different outcome in the immune responses elicited in the presence or in the absence of viral Ag further open the contention of the molecular requirements for immunogenicity and should stimulate a more careful revision of unexpected cross-reactivity among tumors

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore