| Title |
Designer vaccine nanodiscs for personalized cancer immunotherapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Materials, December 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1038/nmat4822 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rui Kuai, Lukasz J. Ochyl, Keith S. Bahjat, Anna Schwendeman, James J. Moon |
| Abstract |
Despite the tremendous potential of peptide-based cancer vaccines, their efficacy has been limited in humans. Recent innovations in tumour exome sequencing have signalled the new era of personalized immunotherapy with patient-specific neoantigens, but a general methodology for stimulating strong CD8α(+) cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL) responses remains lacking. Here we demonstrate that high-density lipoprotein-mimicking nanodiscs coupled with antigen (Ag) peptides and adjuvants can markedly improve Ag/adjuvant co-delivery to lymphoid organs and sustain Ag presentation on dendritic cells. Strikingly, nanodiscs elicited up to 47-fold greater frequencies of neoantigen-specific CTLs than soluble vaccines and even 31-fold greater than perhaps the strongest adjuvant in clinical trials (that is, CpG in Montanide). Moreover, multi-epitope vaccination generated broad-spectrum T-cell responses that potently inhibited tumour growth. Nanodiscs eliminated established MC-38 and B16F10 tumours when combined with anti-PD-1 and anti-CTLA-4 therapy. These findings represent a new powerful approach for cancer immunotherapy and suggest a general strategy for personalized nanomedicine. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 93 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 25 | 27% |
| Spain | 6 | 6% |
| France | 4 | 4% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 3% |
| Netherlands | 2 | 2% |
| Mexico | 2 | 2% |
| Italy | 2 | 2% |
| Japan | 2 | 2% |
| Germany | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 34 | 37% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 61 | 66% |
| Scientists | 22 | 24% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 9 | 10% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 1% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 631 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| South Africa | 1 | <1% |
| Australia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 629 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 142 | 23% |
| Researcher | 83 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 64 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 61 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 38 | 6% |
| Other | 76 | 12% |
| Unknown | 167 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 101 | 16% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 64 | 10% |
| Engineering | 52 | 8% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 45 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 39 | 6% |
| Other | 135 | 21% |
| Unknown | 195 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 287. 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 20 April 2023.
All research outputs
#124,615
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Nature Materials
#45
of 4,410 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,742
of 428,080 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Materials
#2
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,410 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 33.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 428,080 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 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 96% of its contemporaries.