MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993742651 · doi:10.1089/cbr.2006.21.146

Intradermal Vaccination of Dendritic Cell–Derived Exosomes Is Superior to a Subcutaneous One in the Induction of Antitumor Immunity

2006· article· en· W1993742651 on OpenAlexafffund
Siguo Hao, Zhenmin Ye, Jicheng Yang, Ou Bai, Jim Xiang

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Biotherapy and Radiopharmaceuticals · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunotherapy and Immune Responses
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Cancer Agency
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchSaskatchewan Health Research FoundationNational Institutes of HealthUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsVaccinationMicrovesiclesImmunologyImmunityMedicineDendritic cellImmune systemCell mediated immunityImmunotherapyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Because dendritic cell (DC)-derived exosomes (EXO) harbor many important DC molecules involved in inducing immune responses, EXO-based vaccines have been extensively used to induce antitumor immunity in different animal tumor models. However, it is not clear which route of EXO administration can induce more efficient antitumor immune responses. In this study, we compared the antitumor immunity derived from EXO vaccine by way of the two common administration routes, the subcutaneous (s.c.) and the intradermal (i.d.) administrations. Our data showed that the i.d. EXO administration resulted in more EXO-absorbed DC migrating into the T-cell areas of draining lymph nodes than the s.c. administration. Interestingly, the i.d. EXO administration also resulted in an enhanced ovalbumin (OVA)-specific CD8(+) T-cell proliferation and CD8(+) CTL effector responses in vivo, compared to the s.c. administration. Similarly, compared to the s.c. vaccination, the i.d. vaccination induced stronger antitumor immunity in the animal tumor model. Therefore, the i.d. EXO vaccination is superior to the s.c. one and should be considered when EXO-based vaccine is designed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.705

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations26
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Biotherapy and RadiopharmaceuticalsSame topicImmunotherapy and Immune ResponsesFrench-language works237,207