ArticleFrontiers in immunology2026
Article in Frontiers in immunology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Immunotherapies have advanced cancer treatment; however, their clinical efficacy remains limited for solid tumors due to challenges associated with effectively directing immune cells into the complex tumor microenvironment. Recent developments in Ultrasound Contrast Agent (UCA - also known as "microbubble") technology have provided novel opportunities to enhance targeted therapeutic delivery. In this study, we introduce an innovative approach of leveraging microbubbles to enhance immune cell targeting by directly attaching microbubbles to immune cells, establishing an Methods: To create novel microbubble-immune cell conjugates, we created polyethyleneimine (PEI) coated microbubbles and attached them to differentiated HL-60 (dHL-60) cells. These positively charged PEI microbubbles were formulated using azide- DBCO click chemistry between DBCO-labeled microbubbles and the azide functional groups on the PEI polymer. Following this step, we utilized electrostatic interactions to attach our positively charged PEI microbubbles to our negatively charged dHL-60 cells. We conducted viability experiments to assess the compatibility of these designs and then used microfluidic chemotaxis platforms to quantify the microbubble-conjugated dHL-60 cell migratory behavior, examining parameters including migration velocity and percentage. Additionally, we investigated the impact of ultrasound power on primary human neutrophils to validate the functional responsiveness of these physiologically relevant immune cells. Results: We formulated our PEI microbubble-conjugated dHL-60 cells and verified that cell viability remained greater than 88% four hours after the conjugation process for different ratios of dHL-60 cells to PEI microbubbles. We found that cell: microbubble ratios of 1:1 and 1:2 produced higher migration rates compared to ratios of 1:5 and 1:10 for both dHL-60 cells and PEI microbubble-conjugated dHL-60 cells. Moreover, we found that higher microbubble binding also reduces cell velocity. Lastly, we found that cell migration remained comparable towards both chemoattractants under all ultrasound conditions tested (negative control, -30 dB, -10 dB, 0 dB) . Conclusions: Here we demonstrated the feasibility of ultrasound-compatible immune cell constructs while preserving migratory function
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.