Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 314

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Disease-associated Bias in T Helper Type 1 (Th1)/Th2 CD4+ T Cell Responses Against MAGE-6 in HLA-DRB10401+ Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma or Melanoma

Open access
Tatsumi, Tomohide, Kierstead, Lisa S., Ranieri, Elena, Gesualdo, Loreto, Schena, Francesco P., Finke, James H., Bukowski, Ronald M., Mueller-Berghaus, Jan, Kirkwood, John M., Kwok, William W., Storkus, Walter J.·2002·The Journal of Experimental Medicine

Abstract

T helper type 1 (Th1)-type CD4+ antitumor T cell help appears critical to the induction and maintenance of antitumor cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) responses in vivo. In contrast, Th2- or Th3/Tr-type CD4+ T cell responses may subvert Th1-type cell-mediated immunity, providing a microenvironment conducive to disease progression. We have recently identified helper T cell epitopes derived from the MAGE-6 gene product; a tumor-associated antigen expressed by most melanomas and renal cell carcinomas. In this study, we have assessed whether peripheral blood CD4+ T cells from human histocompatibility leukocyte antigens (HLA)-DRβ1*0401+ patients are Th1- or Th2-biased to MAGE-6 epitopes using interferon (IFN)-γ and interleukin (IL)-5 enzyme-linked immunospot assays, respectively. Strikingly, the vast majority of patients with active disease were highly-skewed toward Th2-type responses against MAGE-6–derived epitopes, regardless of their stage (stage I versus IV) of disease, but retained Th1-type responses against Epstein-Barr virus– or influenza-derived epitopes. In marked contrast, normal donors and cancer patients with no current evidence of disease tended to exhibit either mixed Th1/Th2 or strongly Th1-polarized responses to MAGE-6 peptides, respectively. CD4+ T cell secretion of IL-10 and transforming growth factor (TGF)-β1 against MAGE-6 peptides was not observed, suggesting that specific Th3/Tr-type CD4+ subsets were not common events in these patients. Our data suggest that immunotherapeutic approaches will likely have to overcome or complement systemic Th2-dominated, tumor-reactive CD4+ T cell responses to provide optimal clinical benefit.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1084/jem.20012142

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 314

Metadata

Authors
Tatsumi, T., Kierstead, L. S., Ranieri, E., Gesualdo, L., Schena, F. P., Finke, J. H., Bukowski, R. M., Mueller-Berghaus, J., Kirkwood, J. M., Kwok, W. W., & Storkus, W. J.
Venue
The Journal of Experimental Medicine
Published
2002-08-26
Volume
196
Issue
5
Pages
619-628
ISSN
  • 0022-1007 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-9538
OpenAlex
W2119174775
Cited by
314
References
3
FWCI
7.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Disease-associated Bias in T Helper Type 1 (Th1)/Th2 CD4+ T Cell Responses Against MAGE-6 in HLA-DRB10401+ Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma or Melanoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1084/jem.20012142
The paper
Tatsumi, T., Kierstead, L. S., Ranieri, E., Gesualdo, L., Schena, F. P., Finke, J. H., Bukowski, R. M., Mueller-Berghaus, J., Kirkwood, J. M., Kwok, W. W., & Storkus, W. J. (2002). Disease-associated Bias in T Helper Type 1 (Th1)/Th2 CD4+ T Cell Responses Against MAGE-6 in HLA-DRB10401+ Patients With Renal Cell Carcinoma or Melanoma. The Journal of Experimental Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1084/jem.20012142

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.