Fig. 5. Neoadjuvant draining lymph node irradiation fails to preserve the efficacy of radioimmunotherapy.

A B16F10-Luc tumor-bearing mice received α-CTLA-4 and tumor IR, with or without DLN IR at different timepoints. All groups received α-CTLA-4. “Sham IR + ICI” group (gray) received was sham-irradiated “TM IR + ICI” group (blue) received tumor IR, “TM + C-DLN IR + ICI” group (orange) received DLN IR concomitantly to the tumor IR and “TM + NEO-DLN IR + ICI” (purple) received DLN IR 7 days prior to tumor IR. Tumor growth was followed over 35 days. Treatment response represented by the Kaplan–Meier survival analysis (B and E), individual tumor growth curves (C) and a waterfall plot derived from the mRECIST analysis (D). Time to reach 1000 mm³ was used as the endpoint for Kaplan–Meier analysis. Each line in C and each bar in D represents an individual mouse. Parameters derived from the mRECIST analysis in D and E are described in the Methods section. mCR complete response, mPR partial response, mSD stable disease, mPD progressive disease. Number of mice in each group is indicated in the corresponding graph title in C. Logrank test (Mantel–Cox) was used to compare the survival curves; corresponding p values are displayed in E. All p values are displayed, with *, ** and *** indicating p < 0.05, p < 0.01 and p < 0.001, respectively. Source data are provided as a Source Data file. Figure A, created with BioRender.com, released under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International license.