BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that lymph nodes draining sites of cutaneous vaccination could be identified by sentinel node biopsy techniques, and that measuring T-cell response with lymphocytes obtained from these lymph nodes would provide a more sensitive measure of immunogenicity than would the same measurement made with peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL). METHODS: ELISpot analysis was used to determine the magnitude of vaccine-specific T-cell response in the sentinel immunized nodes (SIN), random lymph nodes, and peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) obtained from patients enrolled in clinical trials of experimental melanoma vaccines. RESULTS: The SIN biopsy was successful in 97% of cases and morbidity was very low. The T-cell response to vaccination was detected with greater sensitivity in the SIN (57%) than in PBL (39%), and evaluation of T-cell responses in the SIN and the PBL together yielded T-cell responses in 63% of patients. When the T-cell responses from a SIN and a random lymph node were compared in four patients, immune responses were detected to one of the vaccine peptides in three of these four patients. In all of those cases, responses were present in the SIN but absent from the random lymph node. CONCLUSION: Measurements of T-cell responsiveness to cutaneous immunization are more frequently positive in the SIN than they are in the PBL, however evaluation of both the SIN and PBL permit a more sensitive measure of T-cell immunogenicity than use of either single source.
BACKGROUND: We hypothesized that lymph nodes draining sites of cutaneous vaccination could be identified by sentinel node biopsy techniques, and that measuring T-cell response with lymphocytes obtained from these lymph nodes would provide a more sensitive measure of immunogenicity than would the same measurement made with peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL). METHODS: ELISpot analysis was used to determine the magnitude of vaccine-specific T-cell response in the sentinel immunized nodes (SIN), random lymph nodes, and peripheral blood lymphocytes (PBL) obtained from patients enrolled in clinical trials of experimental melanoma vaccines. RESULTS: The SIN biopsy was successful in 97% of cases and morbidity was very low. The T-cell response to vaccination was detected with greater sensitivity in the SIN (57%) than in PBL (39%), and evaluation of T-cell responses in the SIN and the PBL together yielded T-cell responses in 63% of patients. When the T-cell responses from a SIN and a random lymph node were compared in four patients, immune responses were detected to one of the vaccine peptides in three of these four patients. In all of those cases, responses were present in the SIN but absent from the random lymph node. CONCLUSION: Measurements of T-cell responsiveness to cutaneous immunization are more frequently positive in the SIN than they are in the PBL, however evaluation of both the SIN and PBL permit a more sensitive measure of T-cell immunogenicity than use of either single source.
Authors: U Blum-Tirouvanziam; C Servis; A Habluetzel; D Valmori; Y Men; F Esposito; L Del Nero; N Holmes; N Fasel; G Corradin Journal: J Immunol Date: 1995-04-15 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: M R Parkhurst; M L Salgaller; S Southwood; P F Robbins; A Sette; S A Rosenberg; Y Kawakami Journal: J Immunol Date: 1996-09-15 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: J C Skipper; D J Kittlesen; R C Hendrickson; D D Deacon; N L Harthun; S N Wagner; D F Hunt; V H Engelhard; C L Slingluff Journal: J Immunol Date: 1996-12-01 Impact factor: 5.422
Authors: J C Skipper; R C Hendrickson; P H Gulden; V Brichard; A Van Pel; Y Chen; J Shabanowitz; T Wolfel; C L Slingluff; T Boon; D F Hunt; V H Engelhard Journal: J Exp Med Date: 1996-02-01 Impact factor: 14.307
Authors: Craig L Slingluff; Gina R Petroni; Kimberly A Chianese-Bullock; Mark E Smolkin; Sarah Hibbitts; Cheryl Murphy; Naomi Johansen; William W Grosh; Galina V Yamshchikov; Patrice Y Neese; James W Patterson; Robyn Fink; Patrice K Rehm Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: A L Cox; J Skipper; Y Chen; R A Henderson; T L Darrow; J Shabanowitz; V H Engelhard; D F Hunt; C L Slingluff Journal: Science Date: 1994-04-29 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: A Rosato; A Zambon; B Macino; S Mandruzzato; V Bronte; G Milan; P Zanovello; D Collavo Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 1996-03-15 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: B Gaugler; B Van den Eynde; P van der Bruggen; P Romero; J J Gaforio; E De Plaen; B Lethé; F Brasseur; T Boon Journal: J Exp Med Date: 1994-03-01 Impact factor: 14.307
Authors: Caroline J Voskens; Duane Sewell; Ronna Hertzano; Jennifer DeSanto; Sandra Rollins; Myounghee Lee; Rodney Taylor; Jeffrey Wolf; Mohan Suntharalingam; Brian Gastman; John C Papadimitriou; Changwan Lu; Ming Tan; Robert Morales; Kevin Cullen; Esteban Celis; Dean Mann; Scott E Strome Journal: Head Neck Date: 2012-01-27 Impact factor: 3.147
Authors: Craig L Slingluff; Sandra Lee; Fengmin Zhao; Kimberly A Chianese-Bullock; Walter C Olson; Lisa H Butterfield; Theresa L Whiteside; Philip D Leming; John M Kirkwood Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-05-07 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Craig L Slingluff; Gina R Petroni; Mark E Smolkin; Kimberly A Chianese-Bullock; Kelly Smith; Cheryl Murphy; Nadedja Galeassi; Patrice Y Neese; William W Grosh; Carmel J Nail; Merrick Ross; Margaret von Mehren; Naomi Haas; Marc E Boisvert; John M Kirkwood Journal: J Immunother Date: 2010 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.456
Authors: Craig L Slingluff; Gina R Petroni; Walter C Olson; Mark E Smolkin; Kimberly A Chianese-Bullock; Ileana S Mauldin; Kelly T Smith; Donna H Deacon; Nikole E Varhegyi; Sean B Donnelly; Caroline M Reed; Kristy Scott; Nadejda V Galeassi; William W Grosh Journal: Cancer Immunol Immunother Date: 2015-11-18 Impact factor: 6.968
Authors: Jochen T Schaefer; James W Patterson; Donna H Deacon; Mark E Smolkin; Gina R Petroni; Emily M Jackson; Craig L Slingluff Journal: J Transl Med Date: 2010-08-20 Impact factor: 5.531
Authors: Patrick M Dillon; Walter C Olson; Andrea Czarkowski; Gina R Petroni; Mark Smolkin; William W Grosh; Kimberly A Chianese-Bullock; Donna H Deacon; Craig L Slingluff Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2014-07-15 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Marit M Melssen; Gina R Petroni; Kimberly A Chianese-Bullock; Nolan A Wages; William W Grosh; Nikole Varhegyi; Mark E Smolkin; Kelly T Smith; Nadejda V Galeassi; Donna H Deacon; Elizabeth M Gaughan; Craig L Slingluff Journal: J Immunother Cancer Date: 2019-06-27 Impact factor: 13.751
Authors: Girja S Shukla; Walter C Olson; Stephanie C Pero; Yu-Jing Sun; Chelsea L Carman; Craig L Slingluff; David N Krag Journal: J Transl Med Date: 2017-08-29 Impact factor: 5.531