↓ Skip to main content

Immunization Strategies Producing a Humoral IgG Immune Response against Devil Facial Tumor Disease in the Majority of Tasmanian Devils Destined for Wild Release

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in immunology, February 2018
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 (91st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Readers on

mendeley
63 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.
Title
Immunization Strategies Producing a Humoral IgG Immune Response against Devil Facial Tumor Disease in the Majority of Tasmanian Devils Destined for Wild Release
Published in
Frontiers in immunology, February 2018
DOI 10.3389/fimmu.2018.00259
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ruth Pye, Amanda Patchett, Elspeth McLennan, Russell Thomson, Scott Carver, Samantha Fox, David Pemberton, Alexandre Kreiss, Adriana Baz Morelli, Anabel Silva, Martin J. Pearse, Lynn M. Corcoran, Katherine Belov, Carolyn J. Hogg, Gregory M Woods, A. Bruce Lyons

Abstract

Devil facial tumor disease (DFTD) is renowned for its successful evasion of the host immune system. Down regulation of the major histocompatabilty complex class I molecule (MHC-I) on the DFTD cells is a primary mechanism of immune escape. Immunization trials on captive Tasmanian devils have previously demonstrated that an immune response against DFTD can be induced, and that immune-mediated tumor regression can occur. However, these trials were limited by their small sample sizes. Here, we describe the results of two DFTD immunization trials on cohorts of devils prior to their wild release as part of the Tasmanian Government's Wild Devil Recovery project. 95% of the devils developed anti-DFTD antibody responses. Given the relatively large sample sizes of the trials (N = 19 and N = 33), these responses are likely to reflect those of the general devil population. DFTD cells manipulated to express MHC-I were used as the antigenic basis of the immunizations in both trials. Although the adjuvant composition and number of immunizations differed between trials, similar anti-DFTD antibody levels were obtained. The first trial comprised DFTD cells and the adjuvant combination of ISCOMATRIX™, polyIC, and CpG with up to four immunizations given at monthly intervals. This compared to the second trial whereby two immunizations comprising DFTD cells and the adjuvant combination ISCOMATRIX™, polyICLC (Hiltonol®) and imiquimod were given a month apart, providing a shorter and, therefore, more practical protocol. Both trials incorporated a booster immunization given up to 5 months after the primary course. A key finding was that devils in the second trial responded more quickly and maintained their antibody levels for longer compared to devils in the first trial. The different adjuvant combination incorporating the RNAase resistant polyICLC and imiquimod used in the second trial is likely to be responsible. The seroconversion in the majority of devils in these anti-DFTD immunization trials was remarkable, especially as DFTD is hallmarked by its immune evasion mechanisms. Microsatellite analyzes of MHC revealed that some MHC-I microsatellites correlated to stronger immune responses. These trials signify the first step in the long-term objective of releasing devils with immunity to DFTD into the wild.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 63 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Researcher 5 8%
Student > Postgraduate 5 8%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 22 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 11 17%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 11%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 8%
Environmental Science 4 6%
Other 5 8%
Unknown 25 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. 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 21 September 2020.
All research outputs
#1,385,637
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in immunology
#1,197
of 31,537 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#30,427
of 344,213 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in immunology
#34
of 694 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,537 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% 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 344,213 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 91% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 694 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 95% of its contemporaries.