Supplementary Figure S9. (A and B) Representative dotplots and summary results showing the ability of TAM pretreated with blocking anti-CD64 F(ab')2 and anti-CD32 F(ab')2 fragments (5ug/ml) to kill PKH67+ A431 cells at a 1:1 E:T ratio in the presence of cetuximab (1ug/ml) in a 12 hrs FACS-based assay. Dead A431 tumor cells were defined as TO-PRO-3+PKH67+ cells. (C and D) Representative dotplots and summary results demonstrating the ability of HLA-A2neg TAM to stimulate of Ly95 cells responses (intracellular IFN-γ) after their preincubation with cetuximab-opsonized A549/HLA-A2+NY-ESO tumor cells at the indicated time points. Kruskal-Wallis multiple comparisons test. Data represented as mean ± SEM. (E) The expression of NY-ESO-1 protein in different batches of transduced A549 tumor cells. The expression of intracellular NY-ESO was evaluated by flow cytometry using NY-ESO-1 mAb (clone D1Q2U) that recognizes endogenous levels of total NY-ESO-1 protein. Non transduced A549 cells were used as a control. (F-H) Representative dotplots and cumulative data showing the ability of HLA-A2+TAM to stimulate of Ly95 cells responses (intracellular IFN-γ) after preincubation with A549/HLA-A2+NY-ESOhi (F) and A549/HLA-A2+NY-ESOlo tumor cells (G) in the presence or absence of cetuximab for 4 hrs. Wilcoxon matched pairs test for groups with (+) or without (-) Ab. * p<0,01. Kruskal-Wallis test for TAM groups co-cultured with A549/HLA-A2+NY-ESOhi or A549/HLA-A2+NY-ESOlo. Data represented as mean ± SEM. FcR+ effectors were freshly isolated for all experiments.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Singhal et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: