Extended Data Fig. 3: TIFM +Arginine and RPMI supplemented with phosphoethanolamine alone have effector dysfunction.
From: Tumour interstitial fluid-enriched phosphoethanolamine suppresses T cell function
A) Data related to Fig. 2c. Data from Fig. 2c were analyzed for % of PD-1hi cells from three independent experiments (n = 5 mice/group, RPMI vs. TIFM p = 0.0499, RPMI vs. TIFM+Arg p = 0.190, TIFM vs. TIFM+Arg p = 0.0954) B-E) Data from Fig. 2d-f were analyzed for B) Normalized IFNγ MFI of Live IFN+ CD8+ Cells, C) Normalized TNF MFI of Live TNF+CD8+ cells D) % of IL-2hi cells and E) % of Granzyme Bhi cells. Data are compiled from three independent experiments (n = 5 mice/group, p-values B) RPMI vs. TIFM+Arg p = 0.0478, TIFM vs. TIFM+Arg, p = 0.0398, C) RPMI vs. TIFM+Arg, p = 0.0025, TIFM vs. TIFM+Arg, p = 0.0453, D) RPMI + TIFM+Arg p = 0.0151, E) RPMI vs. TIFM p < 0.0001, RPMI vs. TIFM+Arg p = 0.0002, TIFM vs. TIFM+Arg, p = 0.0002). F-I) Data from Fig. 3i-k were analyzed for F) Normalized IFNγ MFI of Live IFN+ CD8+ Cells, G) Normalized TNF MFI of Live TNF+CD8+ cells H) % of IL-2hi cells and I) % of Granzyme Bhi cells. Data from I-L are quantified from 3 independent experiments (n = 6 mice/group, p-values, F) RPMI vs. RPMI+pEtn p = 0.0627, RPMI vs. TIFM p = 0.0424, RPMI+pEtn vs. TIFM p = 0.0030, G) RPMI vs. RPMI+pEtn p = 0.0336, RPMI vs. TIFM p = 0.0856, RPMI+pEtn vs. TIFM p = 0.8107, H) RPMI vs. RPMI+pEtn p = 0.0137, RPMI vs. TIFM p = 0.9164, RPMI+pEtn vs. TIFM p = 0.2426 I) RPMI vs. RPMI+pEtn p = 0.0018, RPMI vs. TIFM p < 0.0001, RPMI+pEtn vs. TIFM p = 0.0055). Statistical analysis for all indicated comparisons in this figure was determined using a one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test. Source numerical data are available in source data.
