↓ Skip to main content

CpG Oligodeoxynucleotides Enhance Monoclonal Antibody Therapy of a Murine Lymphoma

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical lymphoma, June 2000
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

patent
17 patents

Readers on

mendeley
5 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Article details
Title
CpG Oligodeoxynucleotides Enhance Monoclonal Antibody Therapy of a Murine Lymphoma
Published in
Clinical lymphoma, June 2000
DOI 10.3816/clm.2000.n.005
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

Bacterial DNA and synthetic oligodeoxynucleotides containing unmethylated cytosine-guanine dinucleotides known as cytosine phosphorothioate guanine oligodeoxynucleotides (CpG ODN) can activate various immune-cell subsets, including cells that participate in antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC). Studies have shown that CpG ODN enhance the efficacy of antitumor monoclonal antibody (MoAb) therapy in the 38C13 murine B-cell lymphoma. We performed a series of in vivo experiments using this tumor model to better characterize combination therapy with MoAb and CpG ODN. CpG ODN enhanced the efficacy of MoAb therapy of lymphoma in a dose-dependent manner. This effect was seen whether the CpG ODN was given before or after the MoAb therapy, but was decreased when CpG ODN was given more than 2 days after MoAb therapy. Three doses of CpG ODN and MoAb were more effective than single doses. There was no obvious toxicity with multiple dosing. These studies confirm that immunostimulatory CpG ODN enhance the efficacy of MoAb therapy, and that multiple courses of combination therapy with CpG ODN can serve as an effective therapy for lymphoma. Further exploration of this potentially potent combination of treatments, including clinical evaluation, is indicated.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 5 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Unknown 5 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 40%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 20%
Other 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 20%
Chemistry 1 20%
Neuroscience 1 20%
Unknown 1 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 16 September 2014.
All research outputs
#3,783,464
of 34,410,315 outputs
Outputs from Clinical lymphoma
#4
of 77 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,668
of 58,617 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical lymphoma
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 34,410,315 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 77 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its peers.
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 58,617 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.