Cancer Research AACR Conference on Molecular Diagnostics - 2008  Tumor Immunology: New Perspectives
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online

[Cancer Research 26, 40-47, January 1, 1966]
© 1966 American Association for Cancer Research

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Phillips, M. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Phillips, M. E.

Studies on the Kinetics of Transplantation Immunity1

Mildred E. Phillips

Department of Pathology, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York

Using the parameter of the number of tumor cells necessary to produce s.c. tumors in allogeneic animals at varying intervals after antigenic stimulation, immunity was found to be in force as early as 2 days after primary antigenic stimulation. It reached a peak at 8–10 days and had largely subsided by the end of a month. This method was also applied to the quantitative study of the onset, degree, and duration of immunity elicited by skin grafts. The results obtained with inocula of large numbers of tumor cells (107) were comparable to those obtained with massive skin grafts.

The differences in the degree of antigenic stimulation resulting from different routes of inoculation were studied. It was found that the intradermal (i.d.) route of inoculation resulted in a more intense antigenic stimulation than the s.c. route. When both routes of inoculation were used simultaneously the pattern of growth of the s.c. tumor was influenced by the i.d. inoculation: an i.d. inoculum given 24 or 48 hr earlier caused marked suppression of growth of the s.c. tumor, while when an i.d. inoculation was preceded by an s.c. inoculation, although there was an appreciable effect on the growth size, the growth curves of the 2 tumors were always parallel.

There was no correlation between cytotoxic activity and the degree of immunity in force at a given time.

1 This investigation was supported in part by a grant (U-1413) from the Health Research Council of the City of New York and in part by a grant (IN-14E) from the American Cancer Society.

Received 5/14/65.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
Copyright © 1966 by the American Association for Cancer Research.