Recent studies have shown that the brain is not a barrier to successful active immunotherapy that uses gene-modified autologous tumor cell vaccines. In this study, we compared the efficacy of two types of vaccines for the treatment of tumors within the central nervous system (CNS): dendritic cell (DC)-based vaccines pulsed with either tumor extract or tumor RNA, and cytokine gene-modified tumor vaccines. Using the B16/F10 murine melanoma (B16) as a model for CNS tumor, we show that vaccination with bone marrow-generated DCs, pulsed with either B16 cell extract or B16 total RNA, can induce specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes against B16 tumor cells. Both types of DC vaccines were able to protect animals from tumors located in the CNS. DC-based vaccines also led to prolonged survival in mice with tumors placed before the initiation of vaccine therapy. The DC-based vaccines were at least as effective, if not more so, as vaccines containing B16 tumor cells in which the granulocytic macrophage colony-stimulating factor gene had been modified. These data support the use of DC-based vaccines for the treatment of patients with CNS tumors.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 22 September 2026.
All research outputs
#2,948,651
of 33,666,858 outputs
Outputs from The Journal of Experimental Medicine
#1,980
of 12,982 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,783
of 41,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age from The Journal of Experimental Medicine
#3
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,666,858 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 12,982 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 41,489 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
