2011
DOI: 10.3109/1547691x.2011.587473
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An inter-laboratory retrospective analysis of immunotoxicological endpoints in non-human primates: T-cell-dependent antibody responses

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
8
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 26 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
1
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…However, the 2C1.1 treated group did not show a statistically significant difference from the DNP-IgG 2 control. It would require group sizes of at least 12 animals to achieve sufficient statistical power to distinguish the differences observed here, given the large variation in animal responses to immunization, variations which are consistent with previous observations around the variability of TDAR assay responses in non-human primates (Lebrec et al, 2011). It should be noted that the study design was powered with the expectation that there would be an inhibitory effect similar to that of CsA given the similar level of IL-2 inhibition observed with both molecules.…”
Section: C11 Fails To Block the Primary Immune Response To Srbcsupporting
confidence: 69%
“…However, the 2C1.1 treated group did not show a statistically significant difference from the DNP-IgG 2 control. It would require group sizes of at least 12 animals to achieve sufficient statistical power to distinguish the differences observed here, given the large variation in animal responses to immunization, variations which are consistent with previous observations around the variability of TDAR assay responses in non-human primates (Lebrec et al, 2011). It should be noted that the study design was powered with the expectation that there would be an inhibitory effect similar to that of CsA given the similar level of IL-2 inhibition observed with both molecules.…”
Section: C11 Fails To Block the Primary Immune Response To Srbcsupporting
confidence: 69%
“…This recommendation is driven by having infants of either appropriate body size for blood volume collection or a maturation status that allows for learning and memory testing. With regard to animal number, there are reports that a group size of eight animals for TDAR (Lebrec et al, 2011) and a group size of six to eight animals for lymphocyte immunophenotyping (Krejsa et al, 2013) pro-vide acceptable statistical power for detecting alterations. It has also been demonstrated for learning and memory testing in juvenile animals that a group size of eight animals yields sufficient statistical power (Rose et al, 2015).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Because humans are commonly naïve to KLH epitopes prior to immunization (albeit with cross‐reactive responses to structurally similar endogenous or exogenous carbohydrate epitopes in some cases 14,15 ), KLH has advantages over alternate natural or therapeutically used antigens commonly used for HIC (e.g., varicella zoster or BaCG) which do not allow control of the degree, duration, and time‐elapsed since primary exposure. KLH has been used for over 50 years for TDAR/DTH assessment in both HIC and preclinical contexts 16–19 . Longstanding use has affirmed its utility as a safe and reliable model inducer of a TDAR/DTH response.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%