Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

S A Hancock

Publications and source records attributed to S A Hancock.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Differential NF-kappaB and IkappaB gene expression during development of cardiac allograft rejection versus CD154 monoclonal antibody-induced tolerance.

BACKGROUND: The Rel/NF-kappaB transcription factor pathway, regulated by IkappaB proteins, is considered central to immune responses, although there are surprisingly few in vivo data concerning alloresponses. METHODS: We undertook analysis of NF-kappaB and IkappaB mRNA intracardiac allograft expression, and NF-kappaB nuclear translocation, during acute rejection versus CD154 monoclonal antibody (mAb)-induced tolerance induction in fully MHC-disparate mice. RESULTS: Intragraft expression of all nine NF-kappaB and IkappaB genes increased during development of rejection, and nuclear translocation of p50, p52, and p65 was detected. CD154 mAb therapy decreased mRNA levels of all nine NF-kappaB and IkappaB genes, and impaired nuclear translocation of p50, p52, and p65 NF-kappaB proteins. However, prolonged survival could not be induced by CD154 mAb in p50- or p52-deficient allograft recipients, indicating an absolute requirement for expression of these genes in CD154 mAb-induced tolerance. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that, whereas blanket approaches to NF-kappaB suppression are unlikely to be effective strategies for tolerance induction, a better understanding of the roles of individual NF-kappaB and IkappaB genes may allow development of more precise and effective therapies.

Animals↗

Between-algorithm, between-individual differences in normal perimetric sensitivity: full threshold, FASTPAC, and SITA. Swedish Interactive Threshold algorithm.

PURPOSE: To determine the between-algorithm differences in perimetric sensitivity for the Swedish Interactive Threshold algorithm (SITA) Standard, SITA Fast, FASTPAC, and Full Threshold algorithms; to determine the between-subject, between-algorithm differences in the magnitude of the normal variation in sensitivity. METHODS: The sample comprised 50 normal subjects (mean age, 52.9 +/- 18.5 years) experienced in automated perimetry. One randomly assigned eye was examined at three visits with Program 30-2 of the Humphrey Field Analyzer (HFA). The first visit was a familiarization session. A two-period crossover design with order randomization within visits was used over the second and third visits. SITA Standard, SITA Fast, and HFA 640 Full Threshold were administered during one visit. FASTPAC and HFA 750 Full Threshold were administered during the remaining visit. RESULTS: Group mean Mean Sensitivity was 0.8 dB higher for SITA Standard than for Full Threshold (P < 0.001) and 1.3 dB higher for SITA Fast than for Full Threshold (P < 0.001). A similar trend was found between SITA and FASTPAC. The group mean Mean Sensitivity for SITA Fast was 0.5 dB higher than for SITA Standard (P < 0.001). The pointwise between-algorithm difference in sensitivity was similar for all algorithms. The pointwise between-algorithm, between-subject variability was lower for SITA. The examination durations for SITA Fast and SITA Standard were half those for FASTPAC and Full Threshold; SITA Fast was 41% that of SITA Standard (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: SITA produced marginally higher mean mean sensitivity compared with that of existing algorithms and markedly reduced examination duration. The reduced between-subject variability of SITA should result in narrower confidence limits for definition of normality.

Adult↗