Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 307

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Human effector CD8+ T cells derived from naive rather than memory subsets possess superior traits for adoptive immunotherapy

Open access
Hinrichs, Christian S., Borman, Zachary A., Gattinoni, Luca, Yu, Zhiya, Burns, William R., Huang, Jianping, Klebanoff, Christopher A., Johnson, Laura A., Kerkar, Sid P., Yang, Shicheng, Muranski, Pawel, Palmer, Douglas C., Scott, Christopher D., Morgan, Richard A., Robbins, Paul F., Rosenberg, Steven A., Restifo, Nicholas P.·2011·Blood

Abstract

Cluster of differentiation (CD)8+ T cells exist as naive, central memory, and effector memory subsets, and any of these populations can be genetically engineered into tumor-reactive effector cells for adoptive immunotherapy. However, the optimal subset from which to derive effector CD8+ T cells for patient treatments is controversial and understudied. We investigated human CD8+ T cells and found that naive cells were not only the most abundant subset but also the population most capable of in vitro expansion and T-cell receptor transgene expression. Despite increased expansion, naive-derived cells displayed minimal effector differentiation, a quality associated with greater efficacy after cell infusion. Similarly, the markers of terminal differentiation, killer cell lectin-like receptor G1 and CD57, were expressed at lower levels in cells of naive origin. Finally, naive-derived effector cells expressed higher CD27 and retained longer telomeres, characteristics that suggest greater proliferative potential and that have been linked to greater efficacy in clinical trials. Thus, these data suggest that naive cells resist terminal differentiation, or “exhaustion,” maintain high replicative potential, and therefore may be the superior subset for use in adoptive immunotherapy.

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 · 10.1182/blood-2010-05-286286

Cites

51 of 51 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 51 references

Cited by

See all 307

Metadata

Authors
Hinrichs, C. S., Borman, Z. A., Gattinoni, L., Yu, Z., Burns, W. R., Huang, J., Klebanoff, C. A., Johnson, L. A., Kerkar, S. P., Yang, S., Muranski, P., Palmer, D. C., Scott, C. D., Morgan, R. A., Robbins, P. F., Rosenberg, S. A., & Restifo, N. P.
Venue
Blood
Published
2011-01-20
Volume
117
Issue
3
Pages
808-814
ISSN
  • 0006-4971 (ISSN-L)
  • 1528-0020
OpenAlex
W1975962380
Cited by
307
References
51
FWCI
8.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Human effector CD8+ T cells derived from naive rather than memory subsets possess superior traits for adoptive immunotherapy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1182/blood-2010-05-286286
The paper
Hinrichs, C. S., Borman, Z. A., Gattinoni, L., Yu, Z., Burns, W. R., Huang, J., Klebanoff, C. A., Johnson, L. A., Kerkar, S. P., Yang, S., Muranski, P., Palmer, D. C., Scott, C. D., Morgan, R. A., Robbins, P. F., Rosenberg, S. A., & Restifo, N. P. (2011). Human effector CD8+ T cells derived from naive rather than memory subsets possess superior traits for adoptive immunotherapy. Blood. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2010-05-286286

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.