Table 1.

Vaccinating after Sunitinib improved intratumoral immune infiltration

	Control (±SD)	Sunitinib(a) (±SD)	Vaccine(b) (±SD)	Sunitinib then Vaccine (sequential)(c) (±SD)
Infiltrates(d)
CD8 %	0.32 (0.12)	0.69 (0.22)*	0.46 (0.22)	0.66 (0.03)*
CD4 %	3.86 (3.28)	2.03 (0.75)	3.41 (2.94)	1.90 (0.86)
Treg %	0.11 (0.06)	0.07 (0.02)*	0.07 (0.02)*	0.05 (0.02)*
MDSC %	1.48 (0.23)	1.16 (0.46)	1.35 (0.99)	0.48 (0.13)**
CEA-specific CD8(e)
CEA tetramer %	0.01 (p<0.001)	0.07 (p<0.001)	0.10 (p<0.001)	0.12
CEA tetramer:Treg	0.22	1.14	1.80	3.37
CEA tetramer:MDSC	0.01	0.05	0.04	0.28

Flow cytometric analysis of tumor infiltrating immune-cells of CEA-Tg mice bearing MC38-CEA tumors. Measurements taken 21 days after tumor transplant.

^(a)Sunitinib started 7 days after tumor transplant.

^(b)Vaccine 14 days after tumor transplant.

^(c)Sunitinib started 7 days after tumor transplant, then vaccine on day 14.

^(d)Data from 3 independent experiments, n=12–17/group (open circles from Fig. 5). Statistical significance based on t-test.

^*: p<0.050 vs. Control.

^**: p<0.050 vs. all other groups.

^(e)CEA-tetramer⁺ CD8 lymphocytes were calculated subtracting HIV-GAG tetramer⁺ control from CEA tetramer⁺ cells. Data from one experiment (5 mice/group; pooled cells). Statistical analysis based on Kolmogorov-Smrinov (K-S) test vs. Sunitinib then vaccine (sequential) treatment.