B lymphocytes can be activated to act as antigen presenting cells to promote anti-tumor responses.

Immune evasion by tumors includes several different mechanisms, including the inefficiency of antigen presenting cells (APCs) to trigger anti-tumor T cell responses. B lymphocytes may display a pro-tumoral role but can also be modulated to function as antigen presenting cells to T lymphocytes, capable of triggering anti-cancer immune responses. While dendritic cells, DCs, are the best APC population to activate naive T cells, DCs or their precursors, monocytes, are frequently modulated by tumors, displaying a tolerogenic phenotype in cancer patients. In patients with cervical cancer, we observed that monocyte derived DCs are tolerogenic, inhibiting allogeneic T cell activation compared to the same population obtained from patients with precursor lesions or cervicitis. In this work, we show that B lymphocytes from cervical cancer patients respond to treatment with sCD40L and IL-4 by increasing the CD80+CD86+ population, therefore potentially increasing their ability to activate T cells. To test if B lymphocytes could actually trigger anti-tumor T cell responses, we designed an experimental model where we harvested T and B lymphocytes, or dendritic cells, from tumor bearing donors, and after APC stimulation, transplanted them, together with T cells into RAG1-/- recipients, previously injected with tumor cells. We were able to show that anti-CD40 activated B lymphocytes could trigger secondary T cell responses, dependent on MHC-II expression. Moreover, we showed that dendritic cells were resistant to the anti-CD40 treatment and unable to stimulate anti-tumor responses. In summary, our results suggest that B lymphocytes may be used as a tool for immunotherapy against cancer.

Polypropylene and polypropylene/polyglecaprone (Ultrapro®) meshes in the repair of incisional hernia in rats.

PURPOSE: To compare the inflammatory response of three different meshes on abdominal hernia repair in an experimental model of incisional hernia. METHODS: Median fascial incision and skin synthesis was performed on 30 Wistar rats. After 21 days, abdominal hernia developed was corrected as follows: 1) No mesh; 2) Polypropylene mesh; and, 3) Ultrapro(r) mesh. After 21 days, the mesh and surrounding tissue were submitted to macroscopic (presence of adhesions, mesh retraction), microscopic analysis to identify and quantify the inflammatory and fibrotic response using a score based on a predefined scale of 0-3 degrees, evaluating infiltration of macrophages, giant cells, neutrophils and lymphocytes. RESULTS: No significant difference was seen among groups in adherences, fibrosis, giant cells, macrophages, neutrophils or lymphocytes (p>0.05). Mesh shrinkage was observed in all groups, but also no difference was observed between polypropylene and Ultrapro mesh (7.0±9.9 vs. 7.4±10.1, respectively, p=0.967). Post-operatory complications included fistula, abscess, dehiscence, serohematic collection and reherniation, but with no difference among groups (p=0.363). CONCLUSION: There is no difference between polypropylene (high-density) and Ultrapro(r) (low-density) meshes at 21 days after surgery in extraperitoneal use in rats, comparing inflammatory response, mesh shortening, adhesions or complications.

Polypropylene and polypropylene/polyglecaprone (Ultrapro(r)) meshes in the repair of incisional hernia in rats

PURPOSE: To compare the inflammatory response of three different meshes on abdominal hernia repair in an experimental model of incisional hernia. METHODS: Median fascial incision and skin synthesis was performed on 30 Wistar rats. After 21 days, abdominal hernia developed was corrected as follows: 1) No mesh; 2) Polypropylene mesh; and, 3) Ultrapro(r) mesh. After 21 days, the mesh and surrounding tissue were submitted to macroscopic (presence of adhesions, mesh retraction), microscopic analysis to identify and quantify the inflammatory and fibrotic response using a score based on a predefined scale of 0-3 degrees, evaluating infiltration of macrophages, giant cells, neutrophils and lymphocytes. RESULTS: No significant difference was seen among groups in adherences, fibrosis, giant cells, macrophages, neutrophils or lymphocytes (p>0.05). Mesh shrinkage was observed in all groups, but also no difference was observed between polypropylene and Ultrapro mesh (7.0±9.9 vs. 7.4±10.1, respectively, p=0.967). Post-operatory complications included fistula, abscess, dehiscence, serohematic collection and reherniation, but with no difference among groups (p=0.363). CONCLUSION: There is no difference between polypropylene (high-density) and Ultrapro(r) (low-density) meshes at 21 days after surgery in extraperitoneal use in rats, comparing inflammatory response, mesh shortening, adhesions or complications. .