ライフサイエンスコーパス: mixed lymphocyte reaction

1 ect alloresponse (cell-mediated lympholysis, mixed lymphocyte reaction).

2 c tolerance did not develop clinically or in mixed lymphocyte reaction.

3 by autologous non-T cells in the autologous mixed lymphocyte reaction.

4 nd proliferation capacity was measured using mixed lymphocyte reaction.

5 eaction and tolerance by skin grafts and the mixed lymphocyte reaction.

6 to be functionally active by inhibition of a mixed lymphocyte reaction.

7 ifically peptide-primed syngeneic T cells in mixed lymphocyte reaction.

8 ulated T-cell proliferation in an autologous mixed lymphocyte reaction.

9 r the known function of IL-16 to inhibit the mixed lymphocyte reaction.

10 to modulate the CD3 complex and inhibit the mixed lymphocyte reaction.

11 us, significantly reduced proliferation in a mixed lymphocyte reaction.

12 ibitors stimulated IFN-gamma production in a mixed lymphocyte reaction.

13 ific tolerance upon stimulation in a one-way mixed lymphocyte reaction.

14 interferon gamma production in an allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reaction.

15 vitro, and assayed for capacity to suppress mixed lymphocyte reaction.

16 liferation was present on days 5 to 9 of the mixed lymphocyte reaction.

17 6 cells (TCR-/-) conferred alloreactivity by mixed lymphocyte reaction.

18 ressive activity on cytokine production in a mixed lymphocyte reaction.

19 a triggering in T cells during an allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reaction.

20 their allogeneic potential, as indicated in mixed lymphocyte reaction.

21 ction and T-cell proliferation in an in vivo mixed lymphocyte reaction.

22 al and can costimulate allogeneic cells in a mixed lymphocyte reaction.

23 ability to support T-cell proliferation in a mixed-lymphocyte reaction.

24 o stimulate allogeneic CD4(+) T cells in the mixed-lymphocyte reaction.

25 type-1 T-cell response induced in allogeneic mixed-lymphocyte reaction.

26 y to induce a regulatory T-cell phenotype in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

27 s and naive recipient-matched stimulators in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

28 T DC for stimulating T-cell proliferation in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

29 Ab to CD28 and can mount an alloresponse in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

30 specifically nonresponsive to donor cells in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

31 lial/T cell reaction but not of conventional mixed lymphocyte reactions.

32 effects of rIL-16 on T cell proliferation in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

33 ts ability to inhibit proliferation in human mixed lymphocyte reactions.

34 ell responsiveness of the host using one-way mixed lymphocyte reactions.

35 kine that potently inhibits alloresponses in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

36 as well as recognition in one-way allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reactions.

37 ession and increased tumor immunogenicity in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

38 ent ability to suppress T-cell activation in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

39 5(+)/CD4(+)CD25(-) T cells were evaluated in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

40 une regulatory) macrophages were measured in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

41 ell proliferation and cytokine production in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

42 cells on the immune system was evaluated in mixed lymphocyte reactions.

43 tion, and T cell proliferation in autologous mixed lymphocyte reactions.

44 lyzed for their ability to elicit allogeneic mixed-lymphocyte reactions.

45 geneic cytotoxic T lymphocytes (58%) and the mixed lymphocyte reaction (36%); CTLA4Ig was more effect

46 us postconversion sera on Treg generation in mixed lymphocyte reactions; (4) peripheral blood nonspec

47 emonstrated by significant depression of the mixed lymphocyte reaction (690+/-119 vs. 3850+/-148 cpm,

48 specially in the ICLP (alpha>13) and two-way mixed lymphocyte reaction (alpha>40) assays.

49 The autologous mixed lymphocyte reaction also indicated a trend towards

50 Both pre- and postconversion sera inhibited mixed lymphocyte reactions, although only TAC sera suppr

51 y T cell activity was assessed by autologous mixed lymphocyte reaction (AMLR), an in vitro assay for

52 tudies, in addition to functional allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reaction and accessory-cell dependent m

53 Lewis anti-hamster mixed lymphocyte reaction and cell-mediated lympholysis

54 s determined by various parameters including mixed lymphocyte reaction and cytotoxic T lymphocyte ass

55 lity complex (MHC) antigens as measured by a mixed lymphocyte reaction and cytotoxic T-cell assay.

56 In vitro assays (mixed lymphocyte reaction and ELISPOT) revealed donor-sp

57 iferation and interferon-gamma production in mixed lymphocyte reaction and enzyme-linked immunospot a

58 mice, as well as didemnin M, tested for the mixed lymphocyte reaction and graft vs host reaction in

59 d increased levels of IFN-gamma and IL-17 in mixed lymphocyte reaction and in the graft.

60 r allogeneic antigen stimulation in both the mixed lymphocyte reaction and in the skin explant assay.

61 Suppression was assayed in vitro by mixed lymphocyte reaction and in vivo by targeting cardi

62 with 381 also stimulated a higher autologous mixed lymphocyte reaction and induced a Th1-type respons

63 s showed enhanced functional activity in the mixed lymphocyte reaction and induced T cells to secrete

64 Donor-specific tolerance was assessed with mixed lymphocyte reaction and INF-gamma ELISPOT before (

65 alloreactivity in the host was confirmed by mixed lymphocyte reaction and skin grafting.

66 ontrol levels of proliferation in allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reactions and a type 1 (IFN-gamma) cyto

67 -mPGPtide, inhibited T-cell proliferation in mixed lymphocyte reactions and blocked activation of bot

68 ia cells are highly effective stimulators in mixed lymphocyte reactions and can induce generation of

69 T lymphocytes could be detected on day 2 of mixed lymphocyte reactions and continued to increase in

70 atch induces the expression of granzyme B in mixed lymphocyte reactions and in a model of graft-versu

71 eDCs were functional in mixed lymphocyte reactions and produced tumor necrosis f

72 tely 16 weeks posttransplant for analysis of mixed lymphocyte reactions and spectratyping of human CD

73 ro anti-donor responsiveness was assessed by mixed-lymphocyte reaction and cell-mediated lympholysis

74 Mixed-lymphocyte reactions and delayed-type hypersensiti

75 otypes and clonality, cytokine production in mixed lymphocyte reaction, and characterization of intra

76 to stimulate naive T-cell proliferation in a mixed lymphocyte reaction, and increases the survival of

77 to mitogens and Ags, tolerance to donor in a mixed lymphocyte reaction, and normal Ab titers after te

78 They responded in an autologous mixed lymphocyte reaction, and T cell clones isolated fr

79 profiling, cytokine assays, flow cytometry, mixed lymphocyte reaction, and T-cell proliferation assa

80 s controlling specific immune responses, the mixed lymphocyte reaction, and the structure of Ia antig

81 tant role in primary alloresponses, e.g., in mixed lymphocyte reactions, and organ transplantation.

82 tudies, including cell-mediated lympholysis, mixed lymphocyte reactions, and peptide proliferation as

83 Using mixed lymphocyte reactions as a model of alloimmunizatio

84 T lymphocyte lytic activity were assessed by mixed lymphocyte reaction assay and 51 Chromium release

85 e porcine hematopoietic donor as measured by mixed lymphocyte reaction assay and skin grafting.

86 Mixed lymphocyte reaction assay demonstrated tolerance t

87 In vitro analyses, including a novel mucosal mixed lymphocyte reaction assay, suggested that the mech

88 -cell costimulatory activity, as measured by mixed lymphocyte reaction assay, was lower in patients,

89 feration by CD3/CD28 bead stimulation and in mixed lymphocyte reaction assay.

90 oregulatory activity were assessed through a mixed lymphocyte reaction assay.

91 Cs) to assess VEC proliferation or used in a mixed lymphocyte reaction assay.

92 Mixed lymphocyte reaction assays in both groups revealed

93 ymphocyte proliferation correlated well with mixed lymphocyte reaction assays using purified protein.

94 MC was evaluated using flow cytometry, and mixed lymphocyte reaction assays were used to evaluate c

95 a role of iNKT cells in regulating aGVHD, in mixed lymphocyte reaction assays, CD4(-) iNKT cells effe

96 ocytes from men and women as well as two-way mixed lymphocyte reaction assays.

97 nked immunospot, intracellular cytokine, and mixed lymphocyte reaction assays.

98 ayed different allostimulation capability in mixed lymphocyte reaction assays.

99 days after cessation of the treatment and by mixed lymphocyte reaction at 100 days.

100 ysis, electron microscopy, and an allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reaction at day 14.

101 48 hr, however, the T cells from the primary mixed lymphocyte reaction began producing IFN-gamma, con

102 HLA-G, TGF-beta, and IL-10) were tested on a mixed lymphocyte reaction between antigen-presenting cel

103 ng T cells in both autologous and allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reactions but less efficient at present

104 Both agents effectively inhibited rhesus mixed lymphocyte reactions, but the combination was 100

105 Induction of an in vivo autologous mixed lymphocyte reaction by caspase-modified self-Ags p

106 Stimulation of cells in mixed lymphocyte reactions by wild-type DCs was suppress

107 unoconjugate pretreated donors inhibited the mixed lymphocyte reaction completely without the use of

108 In vitro investigation of baboon anti-pig mixed lymphocyte reaction confirmed that only the indire

109 % CD4/RT1a, 9.28% CD8/RT1a) transplants, and mixed lymphocyte reaction confirmed tolerance in recipie

110 duction and proliferation were assessed in a mixed lymphocyte reaction containing FK734, human T cell

111 CD40:CD40L costimulatory pathway in primary mixed lymphocyte reaction cultures resulted in profound

112 ed and control animals were added to one-way mixed lymphocyte reaction cultures.

113 cytotoxic-T-lymphocyte generation in primary mixed lymphocyte reaction cultures.

114 roliferation and enhanced Treg generation in mixed lymphocyte reaction cultures.

115 Cellular immune responses were monitored by mixed lymphocyte reaction, cytometric analysis of graft-

116 aluated ex vivo by enzyme-linked immunospot, mixed lymphocytes reaction, cytotoxic T lymphocyte, and

117 Mixed lymphocyte reaction demonstrated in vitro donor-sp

118 Mixed lymphocyte reactions demonstrated that CD4+CD25- T

119 Mixed lymphocyte reactions demonstrated that T-cells fro

120 tegrating pre- and post-transplantation (Tx) mixed lymphocyte reaction-determined alloreactive repert

121 ed using fluorescence-activated cell sorter, mixed lymphocyte reaction, enzyme-linked immunospot, sig

122 In mixed lymphocyte reactions, EPO induced a dose-dependent

123 In mixed lymphocyte reaction experiments designed to simula

124 orphology, flow cytometry for phenotype, and mixed lymphocyte reaction for allostimulatory function.

125 Mixed lymphocyte reaction for donor-specific tolerance i

126 ma at the time of neonatal priming recovered mixed lymphocyte reaction hypoproliferation and restored

127 nued insulin independence and donor-specific mixed lymphocyte reaction hyporeactivity.

128 fusion protein does not inhibit the one-way mixed lymphocyte reaction, immobilized RELT is capable o

129 tivated by allogeneic monocytes in a primary mixed lymphocyte reaction in the presence of exogenous i

130 he ability to suppress phytohemagglutinin or mixed lymphocyte reaction-induced splenocyte proliferati

131 hibit DPPIV in cell culture and in the human mixed lymphocyte reaction is demonstrated.

132 protein and assessed in vitro with isogeneic mixed lymphocyte reactions (isoMLRs).

133 owed donor-specific nonresponsiveness in the mixed lymphocyte reaction, lack of antidonor IgG antibod

134 A TR2-Fc fusion protein inhibited a mixed lymphocyte reaction-mediated proliferation suggest

135 y for at least 1 month, and then islets from mixed lymphocyte reaction mismatched primates were infus

136 nd bone were heterotopically transplanted to mixed lymphocyte reaction-mismatched Cynomolgus macaques

137 nsplantation from blood group compatible but mixed lymphocyte reaction-mismatched donors.

138 renal aortic segments were exchanged between mixed lymphocyte reaction-mismatched, blood group-compat

139 ic responder cells taking part in allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) and cell-mediated lympho

140 o antidonor responsiveness was determined by mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) and cell-mediated lympho

141 c analysis and functionally as modulators in mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) and cell-mediated lympho

142 e was assessed by skin grafting, and also by mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) and cell-mediated lympho

143 Regulatory mechanisms were assessed by mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) and cell-mediated lympho

144 ty was assessed by in vitro assays including mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) and flow cytometry to de

145 cells stimulate naive T cells in the primary mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) and induce MC38 tumor-sp

146 ravenous immunoglobulin [IVIG]) inhibits the mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) and induces apoptosis pr

147 Mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) and skin grafting assess

148 Therefore, we developed a novel mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) assay to investigate imm

149 A mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) assay was conducted with

150 vity of the didemnins was determined using a mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) assay.

151 phocytic reactivity and cytokine analysis of mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) culture supernatants by

152 flow cytometric cell sorting approach after mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) culture, we have found t

153 proliferation in dendritic cell-driven allo-mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) cultures by more than 90

154 shows that blockade of B7/CD28 in anergizing mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) cultures of peripheral b

155 rowth factor (TGF)-beta treatment of primary mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) cultures resulted in sec

156 inst cell surface determinants, treatment of mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) cultures with interleuki

157 micro-cell-mediated lympholysis (m-CML) and mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) in recipients with quies

158 h irradiated allogenic stimulator cells in a mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) in the presence of solub

159 rmined by standard skin grafting in vivo and mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) in vitro.

160 The allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) is a complex in vitro as

161 The demonstration that stimulation in the mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) mapped to the same regio

162 Thirty-nine cynomolgus monkeys received mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) mismatched unilateral lu

163 tors) in cell-mediated lympholysis (CML) and mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) responses of normal peri

164 DC activation and mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) studies were performed t

165 noantibodies of these isotypes and displayed mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) tolerance to donor pig m

166 ctivated cell sorting analysis of cells from mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) treated with MEDI-507 re

167 dard skin grafting, flow cytometry (FC), and mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) were used to assess effi

168 SPTs undergo less proliferation in a mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) when compared with unpul

169 , blocked binding of ICAM-1, and inhibited a mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR) with potency significant

170 nisms of tolerance, we examined in vitro the mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR), cell-mediated lymphocyt

171 APC function, assessed using an allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR), demonstrated equivalent

172 Histology, mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR), skin grafting, and flow

173 Using mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR), the effect of atorvasta

174 Proliferation and mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR)-based assays were used t

175 Our results show that primary mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR)-derived CTLs from granzy

176 CD8+ cells were tested for veto activity by mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR)-induced cell-mediated ly

177 while having no effect on the CD4-dependent mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR).

178 T lymphocytes (CTLs) that are generated in a mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR).

179 +) and YFP(-)) was evaluated in an allogenic mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR).

180 ased CTLA-4 was functionally inhibitory in a mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR).

181 GTKO, GTKO/CD46 pigs and human was tested by mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR).

182 , and IL-13 by T cells, in the course of the mixed lymphocyte reaction (MLR).

183 Furthermore, mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLR) against self antigens w

184 f BEL on human regulatory T cells (Tregs) in mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLR) alone and in combinatio

185 Mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLR) and cell-mediated lymph

186 Antagonistic antibody blocked mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLR) in a dose-dependent man

187 Mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLR) using peripheral blood

188 -derived T cell line and replicate, anti-DR1 mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLR), established from an un

189 to the CD31 domain 6 and inhibits the human mixed-lymphocyte reaction (MLR) in a specific and dose-d

190 mulated autologous and allogeneic T cells by mixed-lymphocyte reaction (MLR).

191 presenting cells able to induce the primary (mixed lymphocyte reaction [MLR]) and secondary (recall r

192 ester-labeled CD4+CD25 high FOXP3+ cells in mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLRs) ("the Treg MLR"), with

193 with more than 95% suppression of allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLRs) (29 of 30 donors).

194 cytokine production during donor-antipatient mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLRs) and acute graft-versus

195 Using in vitro human mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLRs) to model allostimulati

196 tion with host PBMCs, as assessed in primary mixed lymphocyte reactions (MLRs).

197 n preventing T cell function using a one-way mixed lymphocyte reaction model for bone marrow transpla

198 uppressed alloreactive T-cell expansion in a mixed lymphocyte reaction model.

199 d used either as stimulator cells in one-way mixed lymphocyte reaction or transplanted into naive Bal

200 fusion protein did not affect the allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reaction, our data indicate that TNFRSF

201 ers to peripheral blood mononuclear cells in mixed lymphocyte reactions (P<0.001).

202 te acute rejection had marked suppression of mixed lymphocyte reaction proliferation to intact donor

203 from the spleen of P5-primed rats had a high mixed lymphocyte reaction proliferative response to P5 p

204 ociated with a significant reduction in host mixed lymphocyte reaction reactivity and is correlated i

205 Analysis of selective mixed lymphocyte reaction responses to DR or DQ antigens

206 Anti-donor mixed lymphocyte reaction responses were positive in the

207 Cytotoxic antibodies, secondary mixed lymphocyte reaction responses, cytotoxic T cells,

208 esulted in normal cytotoxic T lymphocyte and mixed lymphocyte reaction responses, showing that clonal

209 In vitro mixed lymphocyte reactions revealed modulation of the re

210 Moreover, mixed lymphocyte reactions revealed that exposure of CD3

211 n in the recipient peripheral blood, and the mixed lymphocyte reaction showed hyporesponsiveness of t

212 Mixed lymphocyte reaction showed nonspecific suppression

213 Moreover, mixed lymphocyte reactions showed that IL-15/N-803 enhan

214 ferent T-cell receptor (Tcr) ligand systems: mixed lymphocyte reactions, stimulation of Tcr transgeni

215 Skin grafts and mixed lymphocyte reaction studies showed no durable tole

216 6 cells was induced by culture in allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reaction supernatant, an effect largely

217 Cytokine profile of mixed lymphocyte reaction supernatants of T cells obtain

218 Finally, we show that in an in vitro mixed lymphocyte reaction system using human T cells, th

219 vivo approaches, including peptide elution, mixed lymphocyte reaction, T-cell receptor (TCR) deep se

220 ed DC were capable of inducing an allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reaction, they did so to a significantl

221 activity, skew T(H)1 responses in allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reactions through reduction of IL-4 and

222 ) demonstrated evidence of immune deviation; mixed lymphocyte reaction to ACI stimulator cells was vi

223 for more than 4 hr were able to inhibit the mixed lymphocyte reaction to almost background levels, b

224 The chimeric animal was less responsive by mixed lymphocyte reaction to pig-specific stimulators th

225 mmunizing peptides, as well as having strong mixed lymphocyte reactions to donor cells prior to trans

226 e in neonatal and maternal blood samples and mixed lymphocyte reactions to establish the proliferatio

227 These approaches include mixed lymphocyte reactions, trans-vivo delayed-type hype

228 ctor P3 (FOXP3) T-regulatory (Treg) cells in mixed lymphocyte reaction (Treg MLR) and now report addi

229 e short-lived and elicited potent allogeneic mixed-lymphocyte reactions typical of DCs.

230 ory molecules both in vivo and in vitro, and mixed lymphocyte reaction using alloantigen-primed Mac-1

231 ated in an independent patient cohort and in mixed lymphocyte reactions using ex vivo healthy human T

232 Donor-specific mixed lymphocyte reaction was generally preserved.

233 ever, evidence of sensitization in antidonor mixed lymphocyte reaction was observed in seven of eight

234 Previously, the mixed lymphocyte reaction was used as standard to detect

235 Furthermore, we observed that the allogeneic mixed lymphocytes reaction was suppressed in the presenc

236 ions that LFA3TIP inhibits baboon allogeneic mixed lymphocyte reactions, we gave baboon recipients of

237 analysis of peripheral blood lymphocytes and mixed lymphocyte reaction were performed before transpla

238 Primary one-way mixed lymphocyte reactions were established, and the exp

239 Mixed lymphocyte reactions were performed combining enri

240 Mixed lymphocyte reactions were performed in naive gld,

241 In syngeneic mixed-lymphocyte reactions with BALB/c splenocytes, A20

242 ch combining a classical in vitro assay, the mixed lymphocyte reaction, with deep T cell receptor seq

243 ne costimulatory blockade was tested in xeno-mixed lymphocyte reactions (XMLRs) and in natural killer