pd l1 group  (MedChemExpress)

Journal: Nature Biomedical Engineering

Article Title: Potentiating cancer immunotherapies with modular albumin-hitchhiking nanobody–STING agonist conjugates

doi: 10.1038/s41551-025-01400-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: a , Schematic of EMT6 tumour inoculation, treatment schedule and study end point for gene expression and flow cytometry analysis. b , c , Tumour growth curves ( b ) and spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( c ) for each mouse with EMT6 tumours treated with nAlb–diBZI ( n = 9), diABZI ( n = 8) or PBS ( n = 8). P value determined by two-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey’s correction for multiple comparisons with comparison to PBS on day 17 shown. d – j , Flow cytometric analysis of breast tumours and spleen 24 h following final dose of nAlb–diABZI or PBS ( n = 6). d , t -Distributed stochastic neighbour embedding (tSNE) plots of live cells in EMT6 tumours coloured by cell population with relative expression level of Ki67, CD69 and PD-1 as indicated on heat map. e , f , Heat maps summarizing the fold change in the percentage of indicated cell population ( e ) and fold change in the frequency of NK cells, CD8 + T cells and CD4 + T cells expressing the indicated marker or marker combination in EMT6 breast tumours ( f ). g , Quantification of Ki67 + CD69 + and Ki67 + PD1 + CD8 + and CD4 + T cells in EMT6 tumours following treatment with nAlb–diABZI or PBS. h , Quantification of frequency of major histocompatibility complex-II (MHC-II) + and PD-L1 + macrophages in EMT-6 tumours following treatment with nAlb–diABZI or PBS. i , Heat map summarizing fold change in the frequency of NK cells, CD8 + T cells and CD4 + T cells expressing activation markers within splenic populations. j , Quantification of Ki67 + CD69 + and Ki67 + PD1 + CD8 + and CD4 + T cells in spleens. P values determined by two-tailed Student’s t -test. Replicates are biological, and data are shown as mean ± s.e.m. Panel a created with BioRender.com .

Article Snippet: In d , end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS group or between nAlb–diABZI and AP–diABZI as indicated. e , f , Spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( e ) and Kaplan–Meier survival curves ( f ) of mice challenged or re-challenged (for complete responders to the treatment regimen) with EMT6 cells ( n = 10 for treatment-naive and re-challenge of mice treated with AP–diABZI; n = 9 for re-challenge of mice treated with nAlb–diABZI + ICB); end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to treatment-naive group. g , Scheme of EMT6 WT and EMT6 PD-L1 KO tumour inoculation and treatment schedule. h , Kaplan–Meier survival plots for mice with EMT6 WT ( n = 13) or PD-L1 KO ( n = 5) tumours treated with AP–diABZI or PBS; end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS (WT) group or between WT and PD-L1 KO groups as indicated in the legend. i , j , Volcano plots representing −log 10 (significance) and log (fold change) for gene expression analysis in nAlb–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( i ) and AP–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( j ). k – m , Heat maps of NanoString gene cluster matrices showing Z score fold changes for functional gene annotations ( k ), biological signatures ( l ) and cell types ( n = 4 for PBS and AP–diABZI; n = 3 for nAlb–diABZI) ( m ).

Techniques: Gene Expression, Flow Cytometry, Comparison, Expressing, Marker, Immunopeptidomics, Activation Assay, Two Tailed Test

Journal: Nature Biomedical Engineering

Article Title: Potentiating cancer immunotherapies with modular albumin-hitchhiking nanobody–STING agonist conjugates

doi: 10.1038/s41551-025-01400-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: a , Scheme for the cloning, expression and bioconjugation of small molecule cargo to generate the AP–diABZI conjugate. b , c , SDS–PAGE ( b ) and ESI–MS ( c ) confirming the purity and molecular weight of AP conjugates (see Source Data for uncropped gels in ref. ). d , e , Dose–response curves for indicated nanobody–diABZI conjugate in A549-Dual ( n = 3) ( d ) and THP1-Dual type I interferon reporter cell lines ( n = 3) ( e ) with estimated EC 50 values indicated in the legends. f , qPCR analysis of genes associated with STING activation in BMDMs in response to treatment at discrete time points with indicated agonist at 0.25 µM ( n = 3). g , h , Dose–response curve for nAlb–Cy5 and AP–Cy5 conjugate intracellular uptake and surface binding at 37 °C and 4 °C as measured by flow cytometry in B16.F10 cells ( n = 2 at 4 °C and n = 3 at 37 °C) ( g ) and EMT6 cells ( n = 3) ( h ). i , MFI for nAlb–Cy5 and AP–Cy5 conjugate surface binding at 2 µM compared to PBS (0 µM) for EMT6 WT and EMT6 PD-L1 KO cell lines at 37 °C ( n = 3). KO, knock-out; WT, wild type. j , Pharmacokinetics of indicated nanobody–Cy5 conjugate in healthy Balb/c female mice ( n = 4 for nPD-L1–Cy5; n = 5 for all other groups). Elimination phase half-life and AUC are indicated in the legend. k , Representative IVIS fluorescence images of excised tumours and major organs (left) and quantification of average radiant efficiencies (right) of tumours and major organs 48 h after administration of nPD-L1–Cy5 and AP–Cy5 in mice with EMT6 breast tumours ( n = 4). P values determined by repeated measures ANOVA with Dunnett’s multiple comparison test for tumour compared to indicated tissue. l , Comparison of Cy5 radiant efficiencies in tumour tissue 48 h following administration of indicated nanobody–Cy5 conjugate ( n = 6 for PBS and nAlb–Cy5; n = 4 for AP–Cy5; n = 3 for nPD-L1–Cy5). P values determined by one-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey’s correction for multiple comparisons with comparisons between all groups and PBS and between nAlb–Cy5 and AP–Cy5 as indicated. m , Representative IVIS fluorescence images of excised tumours and major organs (left) and quantification of average radiant efficiencies (right) of tumours and major organs 48 h after administration of AP–Cy5 in mice with wild-type EMT6 (WT) and PD-L1 knock-out EMT6 (PD-L1 KO) breast tumours ( n = 5). P values determined by repeated measures ANOVA with Dunnett’s multiple comparison test for WT versus PD-L1 KO groups. Replicates are biological, and data are shown as mean ± s.e.m. Panel a created with BioRender.com .

Article Snippet: In d , end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS group or between nAlb–diABZI and AP–diABZI as indicated. e , f , Spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( e ) and Kaplan–Meier survival curves ( f ) of mice challenged or re-challenged (for complete responders to the treatment regimen) with EMT6 cells ( n = 10 for treatment-naive and re-challenge of mice treated with AP–diABZI; n = 9 for re-challenge of mice treated with nAlb–diABZI + ICB); end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to treatment-naive group. g , Scheme of EMT6 WT and EMT6 PD-L1 KO tumour inoculation and treatment schedule. h , Kaplan–Meier survival plots for mice with EMT6 WT ( n = 13) or PD-L1 KO ( n = 5) tumours treated with AP–diABZI or PBS; end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS (WT) group or between WT and PD-L1 KO groups as indicated in the legend. i , j , Volcano plots representing −log 10 (significance) and log (fold change) for gene expression analysis in nAlb–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( i ) and AP–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( j ). k – m , Heat maps of NanoString gene cluster matrices showing Z score fold changes for functional gene annotations ( k ), biological signatures ( l ) and cell types ( n = 4 for PBS and AP–diABZI; n = 3 for nAlb–diABZI) ( m ).

Techniques: Cloning, Expressing, SDS Page, Molecular Weight, Activation Assay, Binding Assay, Flow Cytometry, Knock-Out, Drug discovery, Fluorescence, Comparison

Journal: Nature Biomedical Engineering

Article Title: Potentiating cancer immunotherapies with modular albumin-hitchhiking nanobody–STING agonist conjugates

doi: 10.1038/s41551-025-01400-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: a , Schematic of EMT6 tumour inoculation and treatment schedule; nanobody–diABZI conjugates and PBS (vehicle) were administered intravenously, and ICB (anti-PD-L1 IgG) was injected intraperitoneally. b – d , Tumour growth curves ( b ), spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( c ) and Kaplan–Meier survival plots ( d ) for mice with EMT6 tumours treated as indicated ( n = 10). CR, complete responder. P values in b determined by one-way ANOVA with Dunnett’s multiple comparison test for each group compared to PBS on day 22. In d , end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS group or between nAlb–diABZI and AP–diABZI as indicated. e , f , Spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( e ) and Kaplan–Meier survival curves ( f ) of mice challenged or re-challenged (for complete responders to the treatment regimen) with EMT6 cells ( n = 10 for treatment-naive and re-challenge of mice treated with AP–diABZI; n = 9 for re-challenge of mice treated with nAlb–diABZI + ICB); end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to treatment-naive group. g , Scheme of EMT6 WT and EMT6 PD-L1 KO tumour inoculation and treatment schedule. h , Kaplan–Meier survival plots for mice with EMT6 WT ( n = 13) or PD-L1 KO ( n = 5) tumours treated with AP–diABZI or PBS; end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS (WT) group or between WT and PD-L1 KO groups as indicated in the legend. i , j , Volcano plots representing −log 10 (significance) and log 2 (fold change) for gene expression analysis in nAlb–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( i ) and AP–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( j ). k – m , Heat maps of NanoString gene cluster matrices showing Z score fold changes for functional gene annotations ( k ), biological signatures ( l ) and cell types ( n = 4 for PBS and AP–diABZI; n = 3 for nAlb–diABZI) ( m ). Replicates are biological, and data are shown as mean ± s.e.m. Panels a and g created with BioRender.com .

Article Snippet: In d , end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS group or between nAlb–diABZI and AP–diABZI as indicated. e , f , Spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( e ) and Kaplan–Meier survival curves ( f ) of mice challenged or re-challenged (for complete responders to the treatment regimen) with EMT6 cells ( n = 10 for treatment-naive and re-challenge of mice treated with AP–diABZI; n = 9 for re-challenge of mice treated with nAlb–diABZI + ICB); end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to treatment-naive group. g , Scheme of EMT6 WT and EMT6 PD-L1 KO tumour inoculation and treatment schedule. h , Kaplan–Meier survival plots for mice with EMT6 WT ( n = 13) or PD-L1 KO ( n = 5) tumours treated with AP–diABZI or PBS; end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS (WT) group or between WT and PD-L1 KO groups as indicated in the legend. i , j , Volcano plots representing −log 10 (significance) and log (fold change) for gene expression analysis in nAlb–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( i ) and AP–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( j ). k – m , Heat maps of NanoString gene cluster matrices showing Z score fold changes for functional gene annotations ( k ), biological signatures ( l ) and cell types ( n = 4 for PBS and AP–diABZI; n = 3 for nAlb–diABZI) ( m ).

Techniques: Injection, Comparison, Gene Expression, Functional Assay

Journal: Nature Biomedical Engineering

Article Title: Potentiating cancer immunotherapies with modular albumin-hitchhiking nanobody–STING agonist conjugates

doi: 10.1038/s41551-025-01400-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: Flow cytometric analysis of orthotopic EMT6 breast tumours 24 h following two intravenous doses of AP–diABZI ( n = 8) or PBS ( n = 7). a , tSNE plots of live cells in EMT6 tumours coloured by cell population with relative expression level of Ki67, CD69, PD-1 and PD-L1 as indicated on heat map. b , Heat map summarizing the fold change in the percentage of indicated cell populations in EMT6 tumours. c , Bar plots showing an increase in CD8 + cells and the ratio of CD8 + to CD4 + FoxP3 + cells (% of CD3 + tumour cells). d , Quantification of Ki67 + CD69 + and Ki67 + PD1 + CD8 + T cells in EMT6 tumours. e , Spleen phenotyping heat map of frequency of NK cells, CD8 + T cells and CD4 + T cells ( n = 7). In b – e , P values determined by two-tailed Student’s t -test. f , Schematic of EMT6 tumour inoculation and treatment schedule with depletion antibodies anti-Asialo GM1 (αNK) IgG, anti-CD8 IgG and anti-CD4 IgG ( n = 13 for PBS and AP–diABZI and n = 7 for AP–diABZI combined with anti-Asialo GM1, anti-CD8 or anti-CD4 IgG). g , h , Tumour growth curves ( g ) and Kaplan–Meier survival plots ( h ) for mice with EMT6 tumours treated as indicated. In g , P values determined by two-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey’s correction for multiple comparisons for all groups compared to PBS on day 22. In h , end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P values determined by log-rank test compared to PBS. Replicates are biological, and data are shown as mean ± s.e.m. Panel f created with BioRender.com .

Article Snippet: In d , end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS group or between nAlb–diABZI and AP–diABZI as indicated. e , f , Spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( e ) and Kaplan–Meier survival curves ( f ) of mice challenged or re-challenged (for complete responders to the treatment regimen) with EMT6 cells ( n = 10 for treatment-naive and re-challenge of mice treated with AP–diABZI; n = 9 for re-challenge of mice treated with nAlb–diABZI + ICB); end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to treatment-naive group. g , Scheme of EMT6 WT and EMT6 PD-L1 KO tumour inoculation and treatment schedule. h , Kaplan–Meier survival plots for mice with EMT6 WT ( n = 13) or PD-L1 KO ( n = 5) tumours treated with AP–diABZI or PBS; end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS (WT) group or between WT and PD-L1 KO groups as indicated in the legend. i , j , Volcano plots representing −log 10 (significance) and log (fold change) for gene expression analysis in nAlb–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( i ) and AP–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( j ). k – m , Heat maps of NanoString gene cluster matrices showing Z score fold changes for functional gene annotations ( k ), biological signatures ( l ) and cell types ( n = 4 for PBS and AP–diABZI; n = 3 for nAlb–diABZI) ( m ).

Techniques: Expressing, Two Tailed Test

Journal: Nature Biomedical Engineering

Article Title: Potentiating cancer immunotherapies with modular albumin-hitchhiking nanobody–STING agonist conjugates

doi: 10.1038/s41551-025-01400-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: a , Schematic of B16.F10 tumour inoculation and treatment schedule; nanobody–diABZI conjugates and PBS (vehicle) were administered intravenously, and ICB (anti-PD-L1 IgG) was injected intraperitoneally. b – d , Tumour growth curves ( b ), spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( c ) and Kaplan–Meier survival plots ( d ) ( n = 15 for PBS; n = 10 for all other groups). In b , P values determined by two-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey’s correction for multiple comparisons for all groups compared to PBS on day 18. In d , end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P values determined by log-rank test compared to PBS control or between nAlb–diABZI and AP–diABZI as indicated. e , Schematic of B16.F10-OVA tumour inoculation, treatment schedule and study end point for flow cytometry analysis ( n = 12). f , Tumour weight on day 15 for mice with B16.F10-OVA tumours treated with AP–diABZI or PBS. g , Frequency of CD4 + and CD8 + T cells in the spleen at study end point. h – k , Flow cytometric analysis of the frequency of CD69 + CD8 + and CD4 + T cells ( h ), CD44 + CD62L − effector memory T cells ( i ), CD44 − CD62L + naive T cells ( j ) and CD44 + CD62L + central memory T cells ( k ). l , Representative flow cytometry dot plots (left) and analysis of the frequency of SIINFEKL/H-2Kb tetramer + ((PE) (MFI)) CD8 + T cells ((FITC) (MFI)) (right) in the spleen at study end point. m , Representative flow cytometry dot plots showing the distribution of CD8 + T EM (CD44 + CD62L − ) and T CM (CD44 + CD62L + ) (CD44: (PE/Cy5) (MFI); CD62L: (BV711) (MFI)) within the OVA-specific (tetramer + ) and non-OVA-specific (tetramer − ) populations. P values determined by two-tailed Student’s t -test. Replicates are biological, and data are shown as mean ± s.e.m. Panels a and e created with BioRender.com .

Article Snippet: In d , end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS group or between nAlb–diABZI and AP–diABZI as indicated. e , f , Spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( e ) and Kaplan–Meier survival curves ( f ) of mice challenged or re-challenged (for complete responders to the treatment regimen) with EMT6 cells ( n = 10 for treatment-naive and re-challenge of mice treated with AP–diABZI; n = 9 for re-challenge of mice treated with nAlb–diABZI + ICB); end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to treatment-naive group. g , Scheme of EMT6 WT and EMT6 PD-L1 KO tumour inoculation and treatment schedule. h , Kaplan–Meier survival plots for mice with EMT6 WT ( n = 13) or PD-L1 KO ( n = 5) tumours treated with AP–diABZI or PBS; end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS (WT) group or between WT and PD-L1 KO groups as indicated in the legend. i , j , Volcano plots representing −log 10 (significance) and log (fold change) for gene expression analysis in nAlb–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( i ) and AP–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( j ). k – m , Heat maps of NanoString gene cluster matrices showing Z score fold changes for functional gene annotations ( k ), biological signatures ( l ) and cell types ( n = 4 for PBS and AP–diABZI; n = 3 for nAlb–diABZI) ( m ).

Techniques: Injection, Control, Flow Cytometry, Two Tailed Test

Journal: Nature Biomedical Engineering

Article Title: Potentiating cancer immunotherapies with modular albumin-hitchhiking nanobody–STING agonist conjugates

doi: 10.1038/s41551-025-01400-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: Serum cytokine concentration in B16.F10 tumor bearing C57BL/6 female mice 4 h after the first treatment represented as (a) heat maps and (b) bar plots (n = 10). ICB: Anti-PD-L1 IgG. P values determined by one-way ANOVA with ( a ) Dunnett’s multiple comparison test for all groups vs. PBS and ( b ) post-hoc Tukey’s correction for multiple comparisons. Replicates are biological, and data are shown as mean ± SEM.

Article Snippet: In d , end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS group or between nAlb–diABZI and AP–diABZI as indicated. e , f , Spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( e ) and Kaplan–Meier survival curves ( f ) of mice challenged or re-challenged (for complete responders to the treatment regimen) with EMT6 cells ( n = 10 for treatment-naive and re-challenge of mice treated with AP–diABZI; n = 9 for re-challenge of mice treated with nAlb–diABZI + ICB); end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to treatment-naive group. g , Scheme of EMT6 WT and EMT6 PD-L1 KO tumour inoculation and treatment schedule. h , Kaplan–Meier survival plots for mice with EMT6 WT ( n = 13) or PD-L1 KO ( n = 5) tumours treated with AP–diABZI or PBS; end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS (WT) group or between WT and PD-L1 KO groups as indicated in the legend. i , j , Volcano plots representing −log 10 (significance) and log (fold change) for gene expression analysis in nAlb–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( i ) and AP–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( j ). k – m , Heat maps of NanoString gene cluster matrices showing Z score fold changes for functional gene annotations ( k ), biological signatures ( l ) and cell types ( n = 4 for PBS and AP–diABZI; n = 3 for nAlb–diABZI) ( m ).

Techniques: Concentration Assay, Comparison

Journal: Nature Biomedical Engineering

Article Title: Potentiating cancer immunotherapies with modular albumin-hitchhiking nanobody–STING agonist conjugates

doi: 10.1038/s41551-025-01400-0

Figure Lengend Snippet: a , Schematic of B16.F10-Luc intravenous tumour inoculation, treatment schedule and study end point for analysis of lung tumour burden; nanobody–diABZI conjugates and PBS (vehicle) were administered intravenously, and ICB (anti-PD-L1 IgG) was injected intraperitoneally ( n = 15 for AP–diABZI; n = 14 for PBS; n = 12 for ICB and nAlb–diABZI + ICB; n = 11 for nAlb–diABZI). b , c , Representative images of lungs ( b ) and lung weights ( c ) of mice treated as indicated. d , e , Representative IVIS luminescence images ( d ) and quantification of average radiance from luciferase expressing B16.F10 cells within isolated lung tissue ( e ). P values determined by one-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey’s correction for multiple comparisons for all groups versus PBS or nAlb–diABZI versus AP–diABZI as indicated. f – i , Evaluation of AP–diABZI as an adjuvant therapy for adoptive OT-I T-cell transfer therapy in a B16.F10-OVA model. f , Schematic of B16.F10-OVA tumour inoculation and of treatment schedule with OT-I T cells (0.5 million cells) on either day 9 (OT-I alone or single dose AP–diABZI pre-treatment) or day 15 (three-dose AP–diABZI pre-treatment). g – i , Tumour growth curves ( g ), spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( h ) and Kaplan–Meier survival curves ( i ) ( n = 15 for PBS; n = 12 for all other treatments). In g , P values determined by two-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey’s correction for multiple comparisons for all groups compared to PBS on day 17. In i , end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test for comparison to PBS group or for the comparisons indicated in the legend. Replicates are biological, and data are shown as mean ± s.e.m. Panels a and f created with BioRender.com .

Article Snippet: In d , end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS group or between nAlb–diABZI and AP–diABZI as indicated. e , f , Spider plots of individual tumour growth curves ( e ) and Kaplan–Meier survival curves ( f ) of mice challenged or re-challenged (for complete responders to the treatment regimen) with EMT6 cells ( n = 10 for treatment-naive and re-challenge of mice treated with AP–diABZI; n = 9 for re-challenge of mice treated with nAlb–diABZI + ICB); end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to treatment-naive group. g , Scheme of EMT6 WT and EMT6 PD-L1 KO tumour inoculation and treatment schedule. h , Kaplan–Meier survival plots for mice with EMT6 WT ( n = 13) or PD-L1 KO ( n = 5) tumours treated with AP–diABZI or PBS; end-point criteria of 1,500 mm 3 tumour volume with P value determined by log-rank test compared to PBS (WT) group or between WT and PD-L1 KO groups as indicated in the legend. i , j , Volcano plots representing −log 10 (significance) and log (fold change) for gene expression analysis in nAlb–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( i ) and AP–diABZI versus PBS ( n = 4) ( j ). k – m , Heat maps of NanoString gene cluster matrices showing Z score fold changes for functional gene annotations ( k ), biological signatures ( l ) and cell types ( n = 4 for PBS and AP–diABZI; n = 3 for nAlb–diABZI) ( m ).

Techniques: Injection, Luciferase, Expressing, Isolation, Adjuvant, Comparison