| Title |
Targeted Programming of the Lymph Node Environment Causes Evolution of Local and Systemic Immunity
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12195-016-0455-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
James I. Andorko, Joshua M. Gammon, Lisa H. Tostanoski, Qin Zeng, Christopher M. Jewell |
| Abstract |
Biomaterial vaccines offer cargo protection, targeting, and co-delivery of signals to immune organs such as lymph nodes (LNs), tissues that coordinate adaptive immunity. Understanding how individual vaccine components impact immune response has been difficult owing to the systemic nature of delivery. Direct intra-lymph node (i.LN.) injection offers a unique opportunity to dissect how the doses, kinetics, and combinations of signals reaching LNs influence the LN environment. Here, i.LN. injection was used as a tool to study the local and systemic responses to vaccines comprised of soluble antigen and degradable polymer particles encapsulating toll-like receptor agonists as adjuvants. Microparticle vaccines increased antigen presenting cells and lymphocytes in LNs, enhancing activation of these cells. Enumeration of antigen-specific CD8(+) T cells in blood revealed expansion over 7 days, followed by a contraction period over 1 month as memory developed. Extending this strategy to conserved mouse and human tumor antigens resulted in tumor antigen-specific primary and recall responses by CD8(+) T cells. During challenge with an aggressive metastatic melanoma model, i.LN. delivery of depots slowed tumor growth more than a potent human vaccine adjuvant, demonstrating local treatment of a target immunological site can promote responses that are potent, systemic, and antigen-specific. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 31 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 10 | 32% |
| Researcher | 5 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Engineering | 7 | 23% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 13% |
| Chemical Engineering | 2 | 6% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 6 | 19% |
| Unknown | 7 | 23% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 August 2016.
All research outputs
#19,945,185
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering
#397
of 503 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,318
of 367,736 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cellular and Molecular Bioengineering
#12
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 503 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.7. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 367,736 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.