Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Jan 15.
Published in final edited form as: Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Jan 15;15(2):597–606. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-1277

Figure 4. Administration of αGC does not enhance the response of 4T1 tumor-bearing WT mice to local RT and CTLA-4 blockade.

Figure 4

Treatment was started on Day 13 post-s.c. inoculation in the flank. RT was delivered in two fractions of 12 Gy to the s.c. tumors on Day 13 and 14. 9H10 was given i.p. 1, 4 and 7 days post-RT. αGC (100 ng) was given i.p. twice per week starting on Day 1 post-RT. WT mice (N=5/group) were treated with (A) vehicle (closed circles), 9H10 + vehicle (closed diamonds), RT + vehicle (closed squares), RT + 9H10 + vehicle (closed triangles), (B) αGC (open circles), 9H10 + αGC (open diamonds), RT + αGC (open squares), or RT + 9H10 + αGC (open triangles). Tumor volume is shown as the mean ± SEM for animals with tumors in each treatment group up to Day 27 when all animals were alive. RT caused a significant (p<0.001 compared to control) tumor growth delay that was slightly enhanced by 9H10 but not by αGC. Although tumor volume differences between mice treated with αGC +9H10 and control were statistically significant (p=0.0396), the triple combination of αGC, RT and 9H10 did not show better tumor control than the combination of RT+9H10, and no complete tumor regression was observed.

HHS Vulnerability Disclosure