Fig. 7: Evaluation of in vivo treatment efficacy of local implantation of PLX-NP@Gel with intravenous injection of P-aPD-1 in B16F10 tumor recurrence model. | Nature Communications

Fig. 7: Evaluation of in vivo treatment efficacy of local implantation of PLX-NP@Gel with intravenous injection of P-aPD-1 in B16F10 tumor recurrence model.

From: Depletion of tumor associated macrophages enhances local and systemic platelet-mediated anti-PD-1 delivery for post-surgery tumor recurrence treatment

Fig. 7

a Schematic illustration of the experimental design of local implantation of PLX-NP@Gel with intravenous injection of P-aPD-1 in B16F10 tumor recurrence model. b Survival curves of the mice treated with different groups (n = 6 mice). Saline; PLX-NP@Gel; PLX-NP@Gel+aPD-1, PLX-NP@Gel and intravenous injection of free aPD-1; PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1, PLX-NP@Gel and intravenous injection of P-aPD-1. The dose of PLX was 5 mg/kg, and the dose of aPD-1 was 0.5 mg/kg. Data were analyzed with Log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test, PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1 vs. PLX-NP@Gel+aPD-1: **P = 0.0049. c Tumor volume change of the mice treated with different groups in three weeks (n = 6 mice). d Representative tumor images of mice among different groups on day 21 (n = 5 mice). Scale bar, 1 cm. e Tumor weight of mice among different groups on day 21 (PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1 vs. PLX-NP@Gel: ***P < 0.0001; PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1 vs. PLX-NP@Gel+aPD-1: **P =  0.0012). Data are presented as mean ± s.d. (n = 5 mice) and analyzed with one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test. f, g Quantitative analysis of the flow cytometry results of CD8+ T cells (f, PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1 vs. PLX-NP@Gel: ***P < 0.0001; PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1 vs. PLX-NP@Gel+aPD-1: ***P = 0.0001) and Granzyme B+ CD8+ T cells (g, PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1 vs. PLX-NP@Gel: ***P < 0.0001; PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1 vs. PLX-NP@Gel+aPD-1: ***P = 0.0003) in the recurrent tumor tissues after different treatments. Data are presented as mean ± s.d. (n = 4 biologically independent samples) and analyzed with one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test. h, i IFNγ (h, PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1 vs. PLX-NP@Gel: ***P = 0.0004; PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1 vs. PLX-NP@Gel+aPD-1: *P = 0.0107) and TNFα (i, PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1 vs. PLX-NP@Gel: ***P < 0.0001; PLX-NP@Gel+P-aPD-1 vs. PLX-NP@Gel+aPD-1: **P = 0.0010) levels within the tumor were detected by ELISA among different groups. Data are presented as mean ± s.d. (n = 4 biologically independent samples) and analyzed with one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett’s multiple comparison test. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Back to article page