The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Reduction of experimental canine myocardial reperfusion injury by a monoclonal antibody (anti-Mo1, anti-CD11b) that inhibits leukocyte adhesion.
Open accessAbstract
A monoclonal antibody (904) that binds to a leukocyte cell adhesion-promoting glycoprotein, (Mo1; CD11b/CD18) was administered (1 mg/kg, iv.) to open chest anesthetized dogs 45 min after the induction of regional myocardial ischemia. Ischemia was produced by occluding the left circumflex coronary artery (LCX) for 90 min and then reperfusing for 6 h. There was no difference between control and antibody treated groups with respect to arterial blood pressure, heart rate, or LCX blood flow. Administration of antibody produced no observable effect on circulating neutrophil counts, suggesting that antibody-bound neutrophils were not cleared from the circulation. The mean size of myocardial infarct expressed as percentage of the area at risk of infarction that resulted was reduced by 46% with anti-Mo1 treatment (25.8 +/- 4.7%, n = 8) compared to control (47.6 +/- 5.7%, n = 8; P less than 0.01). The area at risk of infarction was similar between groups. Circulating (serum) antibody excess was confirmed in all 8 anti-Mo1 treated dogs by immunofluorescence analysis. Analysis of ST segment elevation on the electrocardiogram as an indicator of the severity of ischemia suggests that the anti-Mo1 reduces infarct size independent of the severity of ischemia. An additional group of dogs (n = 5) was tested with a control monoclonal antibody of the same subtype (murine IgG1) and was found to produce no significant reduction in myocardial infarct size. Accumulation of neutrophils within the myocardium was significantly attenuated with 904 treatment when analyzed by histological methods. These data demonstrate that administration of anti-Mo1 monoclonal antibody after the induction of regional myocardial ischemia results in reduced myocardial reperfusion injury as measured by ultimate infarct size.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
Macrophages and Polymorphonuclear Neutrophils in Lung Defense and Injury
Sibille, Y., & Reynolds, H. Y. (1990) · American Review of Respiratory Disease · doi:10.1164/ajrccm/141.2.471 · Cited by 1,083
Local Anesthetics and the Inflammatory Response: A New Therapeutic Indication?
Hollmann, M. W., Durieux, M. E., & Fisher, D. M. (2000) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/00000542-200009000-00038 · Cited by 688
Pathophysiology of ischaemia reperfusion injury: Central role of the neutrophil
Welbourn, C. R. B., Goldman, G., Paterson, I. S., Valeri, C. R., Shepro, D., & Hechtman, H. B. (1991) · Journal of British Surgery · doi:10.1002/bjs.1800780607 · Cited by 501
MICHISHITA, M. (1993) · Cell · doi:10.1016/0092-8674(93)90575-b · Cited by 373
Dreyer, W. J., Michael, L. H., West, M. S., Smith, C. W., Rothlein, R., Rossen, R. D., Anderson, D. C., & Entman, M. L. (1991) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.84.1.400 · Cited by 295
Metadata
- Authors
- Simpson, P. J., Todd, R. F., Fantone, J. C., Mickelson, J. K., Griffin, J. D., & Lucchesi, B. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Investigation
- Published
- 1988-02-01
- Volume
- 81
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 624-629
- ISSN
- 0021-9738 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2151067784
- Cited by
- 636
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 36.33
- 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: Reduction of experimental canine myocardial reperfusion injury by a monoclonal antibody (anti-Mo1, anti-CD11b) that inhibits leukocyte adhesion. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1172/jci113364
- The paper
- Simpson, P. J., Todd, R. F., Fantone, J. C., Mickelson, J. K., Griffin, J. D., & Lucchesi, B. R. (1988). Reduction of experimental canine myocardial reperfusion injury by a monoclonal antibody (anti-Mo1, anti-CD11b) that inhibits leukocyte adhesion. Journal of Clinical Investigation. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci113364
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.