Creation of porcine liver tumor using human hepatoma cell lines: Experimental study

Cancer Biology and Therapy

Volumn 4, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 635-637

  Rai, R ^a,d   Flecknell, P ^b   Richardson, C ^b   Manas, D M ^c  

^a RUSSELLS HALL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c FREEMAN HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^d NONE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Animal model; Hepatoma; Porcine liver rumor; Portal tolerance

Indexed keywords

ALPHA FETOPROTEIN; AZATHIOPRINE; CYCLOSPORIN; PREDNISOLONE;

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CANCER CELL CULTURE; EXPERIMENT; FEMALE; HEPATOMA CELL; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; IMMUNE SYSTEM; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE TREATMENT; IMMUNOTHERAPY; INJECTION; LIVER; LIVER TUMOR; MEASUREMENT; MONITORING; NONHUMAN; PORTAL VEIN; SWINE; TUMOR CELL;

EID: 25144474984     PISSN: 15384047     EISSN: 15558576     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4161/cbt.4.6.1707     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Aden DP, Fogel A, Plotkin S, Damjanov I, Knowles BB. Controlled synthesis of HBsAg in a differentiated human liver carcinoma-derived cell line. Nature 1979; 282:615-6.
2. Gruessner RW, et al. Quadruple immunosuppression in a pig model of small bowel transplantation. J Surg Res 1996; 61:260-6.
3. Visonneau S, Cesano A, Torosian MH, Miller EJ, Santoli D. Growth characteristics and metastatic properties of human breast cancer xenografts in immunodeficient mice. Am J Pathol 1998; 152:1299-311.
4. Schiffer SP. Animal welfare and colony management in cancer research. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1997; 46:313-31.
5. Volpe JP, Milas L. Influence of tumor transplantation methods on tumor growth rate and metastatic potential of solitary tumors derived from metastases. Clin Exp Metastasis 1990; 8:381-9.
6. Mandel TE. Fetal islet xenotransplantation in rodents and primates. J Mol Med 1999; 77:155-60.
7. Simeonovic CJ. Xenogeneic islet transplantation. Xenotransplantation 1999; 6:1-5.
8. Friedman T, et al. Human CD4+ T cells mediate rejection of porcine xenografts. J Immunol 1999; 162:5256-62.
9. Cantor HM, Dumont AE. Hepatic suppression of sensitization to antigen absorbed into the portal system. Nature 1967; 215:744-5.
10. Gorczynski RM. Adoptive transfer of unresponsive ness to allogeneic skin grafts with hepatic gamma delta + T cells. Immunology 1994; 81:27-35.
11. May AG, et al. Survival of allografts after hepatic portal venous administration of specific transplantation antigen. Ann Surg 1969; 170:824-32.
12. Gorczynski RM, Wojcik D. A role for nonspecific (cyclosporin A) or specific (monoclonal antibodies to ICAM-1, LFA-1, and IL-10) immunomodulation in the prolongation of skin allografts after antigen-specific pretransplant immunization or transfusion. J Immunol 1994; 152:2011-9.
13. Roland CR, Walp L, Stack RM, Flye MW. Outcome of Kupffer cell antigen presentation to a cloned murine Th1 lymphocyte depends on the inducibility of nitric oxide synthase by IFN-gamma. J Immunol 1994; 153:5453-64.
14. Thomson AW, Takayama T. Dendritic cells and the outcome of organ transplantation: A contemporary view. Transplant Proc 1999; 31:2738-9.
15. Albert ML, Sauter B, Bhardwaj N. Dendritic cells acquire antigen from apoptotic cells and induce class I-restricted CTLs. Nature 1998; 392:86-9.
16. Philosophe B, et al. Superiority of portal venous drainage over systemic venous drainage in pancreas transplantation: A retrospective study. Ann Surg 2001; 234:689-96.