Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Jun 24.
Published in final edited form as: Int J Cancer. 2010 Apr 1;126(7):1651–1665. doi: 10.1002/ijc.24923

Table 3.

Localization of Foxp3+ cells (mammary)

Model Treatment Sample
size (n)
Health
status
Foxp3+ cells
in lymph node
Foxp3+ cells in
tumor periphery
Foxp3+ cells
within tumor
FVB HER2/neu - 8 Hh-free 68.3 ± 6.8 cells 17.8 ± 3.45 cells 0.2 ± 0.13 cells
HER2/neu sham Sham IgG 6 Hh-free nd 16.5 ± 2.75 0
HER2/neu +anti-TNF Anti-TNF 6 Hh-free 46.4 ± 3.27 16.6 ± 4.47 5.4 ± 1.34
HER2/neu + sonicate Hh sonicate (sterile) 10 Hh-free 39.5 ± 3.51 5.4 ± 1.18 1.10 ± 0.48

Cell counts between groups were compared using Mann–Whitney U analyses.

Foxp3+ lymph node (LN): p < 0.01; untreated (68.3 ± 6.8 cells) vs. anti-TNF-α (46.4 ± 3.27).

Foxp3+ in LN: p < 0.001; untreated (68.3 ± 6.8) vs. sterile Hh sonicate (39.5 ± 3.51).

Foxp3+ in tumor periphery: p < 0.001; untreated (17.8 ± 3.45) vs. Hh sonicate (5.4 ± 1.18).

Foxp3+ within tumor: p < 0.001; sham IgG (0 cells) vs. anti-TNF (5.4 ± 1.34).