Review



anti cxcl5  (R&D Systems)


Bioz Verified Symbol R&D Systems is a verified supplier
Bioz Manufacturer Symbol R&D Systems manufactures this product  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
  • 94

    Structured Review

    R&D Systems anti cxcl5
    Anti Cxcl5, supplied by R&D Systems, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 13 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ena/Human+CXCL5%2FENA-78+Antibody/pmc13130669-580-6-7
    Average 94 stars, based on 13 article reviews
    anti cxcl5 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    94/100 stars

    Images

    Related Articles

    other:

    Article Title: Imbalance in the expression of CXC chemokines correlates with bronchoalveolar lavage fluid angiogenic activity and procollagen levels in acute respiratory distress syndrome.
    Article Snippet: Polyclonal anti-human IL-8/CXCL8, GRO- /CXCL1, ENA-78/CXCL5, IP10/CXCL10, MIG/CXCL9, CXCR2, and VEGF Abs and human IL-8/ CXCL8, GRO- /CXCL1, ENA-78/CXCL5, IP-10/CXCL10, MIG/CXCL9, and VEGF were purchased from R&D Systems (Minneapolis, MN).

    Article Title: Blockade of the chemokine receptor CXCR2 inhibits pancreatic cancer cell-induced angiogenesis.
    Article Snippet: A central feature of all solid tumor growth is the presence of neovascularization.. The CXC chemokines GRO-g/CXCL3, ENA78/CXCL5, and IL-8/CXCL8 have profound angiogenic potential mediated through the CXCR2 receptor.. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the expression of the angiogenic chemokines in three human pancreatic cancer cell lines and to determine the role of these proteins in pancreatic cancer angiogenesis.

    Article Title: Phage display and hybridoma generation of antibodies to human CXCR2 yields antibodies with distinct mechanisms and epitopes
    Article Snippet: Proteins and Antibodies CXCR2 ligands IL-8/CXCL8 (#208/IL-CF), Gro-α/CXCL1 #275-GR), Gro-β/CXCL2 (#276-GB), Gro-γ/CXCL3 (#277-GG), ENA-78/CXCL5 (#254-XB), GCP-2/CXCL6 (#333-GC) and NAP-2/CXCL7 (#393-NP) were obtained from R&D Systems.

    Article Title: Phage display and hybridoma generation of antibodies to human CXCR2 yields antibodies with distinct mechanisms and epitopes
    Article Snippet: CXCR2 ligands IL-8/CXCL8 (#208/IL-CF), Gro-α/CXCL1 #275-GR), Gro-β/CXCL2 (#276-GB), Gro-γ/CXCL3 (#277-GG), ENA-78/CXCL5 (#254-XB), GCP-2/CXCL6 (#333-GC) and NAP-2/CXCL7 (#393-NP) were obtained from R&D Systems.

    Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay:

    Article Title: Tumor-derived interleukin-1 promotes lymphangiogenesis and lymph node metastasis through M2-type macrophages.
    Article Snippet: .. Determination of cytokines by ELISA The concentrations of human IL-1a, IL-1b, VEGF-A, VEGFC, MCP-1/CCL2, Groa/CXCL1, ENA-78/CXCL5, IL-8/ CXCL8, and IL-6 in the homogenized supernatants of mouse xenograft tumors and in conditioned medium were measured using commercially available ELISA kits (R&D Systems). .. When the cells reached subconfluence, the medium was replaced with serum-free RPMI and the cells were incubated for another 24 h. The results, normalized for the number of cells, are reported as picograms (pg) of growth factor/105 cells/24 h. Tumor tissue obtained from mice was homogenized in T-PER tissue protein extraction reagent containing 1 mM EDTA, 0.1 mM Na3VO4, 1 mM PMSF, 10 mg aprotinin/mL, and 10 mg leupeptin/mL, and centrifuged at 13,000 rpm for 10 min. qRT-PCR Total RNA was isolated from cell cultures and tumors using Isogen (Nippon Gene Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan), according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

    Recombinant:

    Article Title: Transepithelial neutrophil migration is CXCR1 dependent in vitro and is defective in IL-8 receptor knockout mice.
    Article Snippet: FITC-labeled IL-8 was kindly provided by Glaxo Wellcome (Research Triangle Park, NC). .. Human monoclonal anti-CXCR1 Ab (clone 42705.111; MAB330 and FAB330F), human monoclonal anti-CXCR2 Ab (clone 48311.211; MAB331 and FAB331F), recombinant GRO-a, and ENA-78 were purchased from R&D Systems (Oxon, U.K.). .. Rabbit anti-mouse Igs, mouse APAAP complexes, Fast-Red substrate, and swine anti-rabbit Igs/ FITC Igs were purchased from Dako (Copenhagen, Denmark).



    Similar Products

    94
    MedChemExpress ena
    Ena, supplied by MedChemExpress, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ena/Enavogliflozin/pm42457123-56-0-7
    Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    ena - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    94/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    86
    Reddit Inc ena
    Ena, supplied by Reddit Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ena/ena/pm42284588-93-1-13
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    ena - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    86/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    86
    Mikrogen Diagnostik recomline ana ena igg line immunoassay
    Recomline Ana Ena Igg Line Immunoassay, supplied by Mikrogen Diagnostik, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ena/hev+igg+igm+immunoblot+recomline+test/pmc12037870-32-8-13
    Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    recomline ana ena igg line immunoassay - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    86/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    94
    R&D Systems anti cxcl5
    Anti Cxcl5, supplied by R&D Systems, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ena/Human+CXCL5%2FENA-78+Antibody/pmc13130669-580-6-7
    Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    anti cxcl5 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    94/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    94
    R&D Systems cxcl5 neutralizing antibody
    Distinct immune microenvironment across LIHV-defined subgroups (A) Immune cell abundance comparison across subgroups using the indicated immune analysis tools across four independent iCCA cohorts. Circle color and size represent log 2 fold change and p value, respectively. (B) Boxplots of CD66b + neutrophils, CD68 + macrophages, CD3 + T cells, CD20 + B cells, and αSMA + fibroblasts across subgroups (Mann-Whitney U test). (C) Heatmap of immune signatures and checkpoint expression summarized as mean Z scores per subgroup across four cohorts. ∗FDR < 0.05; ∗∗FDR < 0.01; ∗∗∗FDR < 0.001. (D) Heatmap of Spearman correlations between chemokine expression and neutrophil infiltration. IHC, immunohistochemistry. (E) Boxplot comparing <t>CXCL5</t> expression across subgroups in the Fu-iCCA cohort (Mann-Whitney U test). (F) Dot heatmap of chemokine gene expression across major cell types in Xue’s scRNA-seq dataset. (G) Boxplots of average CXCL5 expression in tumor cells and macrophages across subgroups (Mann-Whitney U test). (H) Western blot validating CXCL5 knockdown and overexpression efficiency in RBE and HuCCT1 cells. (I) Quantification of migrated neutrophils in transwell assays co-cultured with modified RBE and HuCCT1 cells ( n = 4 replicates per group; mean ± SD; Student’s t test). (J) Western blot analysis of CXCL5 overexpression in KTP cells. (K) Tumor growth curves of mice injected with control or CXCL5-overexpressing KTP cells ( n = 6 per group; mean ± SEM; Student’s t test). (L) Proportion and number of infiltrated neutrophils in control and CXCL5-overexpressing KTP tumors ( n = 6 per group; Student’s t test). ∗ p < 0.05; ∗∗ p < 0.01; ∗∗∗ p < 0.001. See also and and .
    Cxcl5 Neutralizing Antibody, supplied by R&D Systems, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ena/Human+CXCL5%2FENA-78+Antibody/pmc13130669-584-1-4
    Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cxcl5 neutralizing antibody - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    94/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    94
    R&D Systems af254
    Distinct immune microenvironment across LIHV-defined subgroups (A) Immune cell abundance comparison across subgroups using the indicated immune analysis tools across four independent iCCA cohorts. Circle color and size represent log 2 fold change and p value, respectively. (B) Boxplots of CD66b + neutrophils, CD68 + macrophages, CD3 + T cells, CD20 + B cells, and αSMA + fibroblasts across subgroups (Mann-Whitney U test). (C) Heatmap of immune signatures and checkpoint expression summarized as mean Z scores per subgroup across four cohorts. ∗FDR < 0.05; ∗∗FDR < 0.01; ∗∗∗FDR < 0.001. (D) Heatmap of Spearman correlations between chemokine expression and neutrophil infiltration. IHC, immunohistochemistry. (E) Boxplot comparing <t>CXCL5</t> expression across subgroups in the Fu-iCCA cohort (Mann-Whitney U test). (F) Dot heatmap of chemokine gene expression across major cell types in Xue’s scRNA-seq dataset. (G) Boxplots of average CXCL5 expression in tumor cells and macrophages across subgroups (Mann-Whitney U test). (H) Western blot validating CXCL5 knockdown and overexpression efficiency in RBE and HuCCT1 cells. (I) Quantification of migrated neutrophils in transwell assays co-cultured with modified RBE and HuCCT1 cells ( n = 4 replicates per group; mean ± SD; Student’s t test). (J) Western blot analysis of CXCL5 overexpression in KTP cells. (K) Tumor growth curves of mice injected with control or CXCL5-overexpressing KTP cells ( n = 6 per group; mean ± SEM; Student’s t test). (L) Proportion and number of infiltrated neutrophils in control and CXCL5-overexpressing KTP tumors ( n = 6 per group; Student’s t test). ∗ p < 0.05; ∗∗ p < 0.01; ∗∗∗ p < 0.001. See also and and .
    Af254, supplied by R&D Systems, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ena/Human+CXCL5%2FENA-78+Antibody/pm41916296-281-132-129
    Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    af254 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    94/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    94
    MedChemExpress cxcl5 protein
    Multi-omics analyses have revealed YAP1-driven immunosuppressive cellular communities in GC (A) Workflow of spatial transcriptomic profiling of GC specimens ( n = 17). (B) Classification of tumor spots in spatial transcriptome slides based on H&E staining and gene expression profiles. (C) Spatial feature plots illustrating YAP1 expression and the distribution of cell clusters in sample 1. (D) Abundance of cell types in spots with high versus low YAP1 expression, with differences tested by two-tailed t tests. Green p values indicate enrichment in YAP1 Low spots, and red p values indicate enrichment in YAP1 High spots. Cohen’s d applied to standardized differences in means of cell types between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High spots. (E) Overview of YAP1 expression analysis and clinical correlation in FFPE samples from 253 GC patients (cohort 4). (F) Quantitative comparison of CD8 + , CD4 + , and FOXP3 + immune cell densities between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High tumors in cohort 4 (Mann-Whitney U test; Spearman correlation). (G) Representative multiplex immunofluorescence (mIF) images of YAP1 (green), CD68 (red), SPP1 (yellow), and panCK (white) with DAPI (blue) and quantification of SPP1 + macrophage density relative to YAP1 H-scores. Scale bars, 100 μm. (H) Correlation heatmap of YAP1 and chemokine gene expression in tumor cells from cohort 1 scRNA-seq data. (I) Visualization of spatial transcriptomic slides showing co-expression of YAP1 (yellow) with CXCL3/5/8 and CCL20 (blue), with spots of co-expression indicated in green. (J) Comparative analysis of CXCL3/5/8 and CCL20 expression between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High spots within the tumor regions (Mann-Whitney U test). (K) Representative mIF images showing co-localization of YAP1 (green), <t>CXCL5</t> (red), and panCK (white) with DAPI (blue) in tumor regions, accompanied by single-cell correlation analysis between YAP1 and CXCL5 mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) values. Scale bars, 100 μm. (L) Experimental schematic illustrating the co-culture setup of YAP1-overexpressing or YAP1-knockout HGC-27 cells with THP-1-derived macrophages, with selected conditions including CXCL5 neutralization, CXCR2 inhibition, and recombinant CXCL5 treatment. (M) Western blot analysis of CXCL5 protein expression in control, YAP1 OE, and YAP1 KO gastric cancer cell lines. (N) ELISA quantification of CXCL5 secretion in conditioned media from control, YAP1 OE, and YAP1 KO cells. (O) FACS quantification of SPP1 + CD68 + macrophages following co-culture with tumor cells under the indicated conditions ( YAP1 OE/KO, CXCL5 neutralization, CXCR2 inhibition [SB225002], and recombinant CXCL5 supplementation) (see also C).
    Cxcl5 Protein, supplied by MedChemExpress, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ena/ENA-78%2FCXCL5%2C+Human/pmc13006434-79-0-4
    Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    cxcl5 protein - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    94/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    94
    MedChemExpress hy p7158
    Multi-omics analyses have revealed YAP1-driven immunosuppressive cellular communities in GC (A) Workflow of spatial transcriptomic profiling of GC specimens ( n = 17). (B) Classification of tumor spots in spatial transcriptome slides based on H&E staining and gene expression profiles. (C) Spatial feature plots illustrating YAP1 expression and the distribution of cell clusters in sample 1. (D) Abundance of cell types in spots with high versus low YAP1 expression, with differences tested by two-tailed t tests. Green p values indicate enrichment in YAP1 Low spots, and red p values indicate enrichment in YAP1 High spots. Cohen’s d applied to standardized differences in means of cell types between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High spots. (E) Overview of YAP1 expression analysis and clinical correlation in FFPE samples from 253 GC patients (cohort 4). (F) Quantitative comparison of CD8 + , CD4 + , and FOXP3 + immune cell densities between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High tumors in cohort 4 (Mann-Whitney U test; Spearman correlation). (G) Representative multiplex immunofluorescence (mIF) images of YAP1 (green), CD68 (red), SPP1 (yellow), and panCK (white) with DAPI (blue) and quantification of SPP1 + macrophage density relative to YAP1 H-scores. Scale bars, 100 μm. (H) Correlation heatmap of YAP1 and chemokine gene expression in tumor cells from cohort 1 scRNA-seq data. (I) Visualization of spatial transcriptomic slides showing co-expression of YAP1 (yellow) with CXCL3/5/8 and CCL20 (blue), with spots of co-expression indicated in green. (J) Comparative analysis of CXCL3/5/8 and CCL20 expression between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High spots within the tumor regions (Mann-Whitney U test). (K) Representative mIF images showing co-localization of YAP1 (green), <t>CXCL5</t> (red), and panCK (white) with DAPI (blue) in tumor regions, accompanied by single-cell correlation analysis between YAP1 and CXCL5 mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) values. Scale bars, 100 μm. (L) Experimental schematic illustrating the co-culture setup of YAP1-overexpressing or YAP1-knockout HGC-27 cells with THP-1-derived macrophages, with selected conditions including CXCL5 neutralization, CXCR2 inhibition, and recombinant CXCL5 treatment. (M) Western blot analysis of CXCL5 protein expression in control, YAP1 OE, and YAP1 KO gastric cancer cell lines. (N) ELISA quantification of CXCL5 secretion in conditioned media from control, YAP1 OE, and YAP1 KO cells. (O) FACS quantification of SPP1 + CD68 + macrophages following co-culture with tumor cells under the indicated conditions ( YAP1 OE/KO, CXCL5 neutralization, CXCR2 inhibition [SB225002], and recombinant CXCL5 supplementation) (see also C).
    Hy P7158, supplied by MedChemExpress, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/product/ena/ENA-78%2FCXCL5%2C+Human/pmc13006434-79-6-4
    Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    hy p7158 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-09
    94/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    Distinct immune microenvironment across LIHV-defined subgroups (A) Immune cell abundance comparison across subgroups using the indicated immune analysis tools across four independent iCCA cohorts. Circle color and size represent log 2 fold change and p value, respectively. (B) Boxplots of CD66b + neutrophils, CD68 + macrophages, CD3 + T cells, CD20 + B cells, and αSMA + fibroblasts across subgroups (Mann-Whitney U test). (C) Heatmap of immune signatures and checkpoint expression summarized as mean Z scores per subgroup across four cohorts. ∗FDR < 0.05; ∗∗FDR < 0.01; ∗∗∗FDR < 0.001. (D) Heatmap of Spearman correlations between chemokine expression and neutrophil infiltration. IHC, immunohistochemistry. (E) Boxplot comparing CXCL5 expression across subgroups in the Fu-iCCA cohort (Mann-Whitney U test). (F) Dot heatmap of chemokine gene expression across major cell types in Xue’s scRNA-seq dataset. (G) Boxplots of average CXCL5 expression in tumor cells and macrophages across subgroups (Mann-Whitney U test). (H) Western blot validating CXCL5 knockdown and overexpression efficiency in RBE and HuCCT1 cells. (I) Quantification of migrated neutrophils in transwell assays co-cultured with modified RBE and HuCCT1 cells ( n = 4 replicates per group; mean ± SD; Student’s t test). (J) Western blot analysis of CXCL5 overexpression in KTP cells. (K) Tumor growth curves of mice injected with control or CXCL5-overexpressing KTP cells ( n = 6 per group; mean ± SEM; Student’s t test). (L) Proportion and number of infiltrated neutrophils in control and CXCL5-overexpressing KTP tumors ( n = 6 per group; Student’s t test). ∗ p < 0.05; ∗∗ p < 0.01; ∗∗∗ p < 0.001. See also and and .

    Journal: Cell Reports Medicine

    Article Title: Robust transcriptomic hallmarks targeting intratumor heterogeneity in intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

    doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2026.102708

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Distinct immune microenvironment across LIHV-defined subgroups (A) Immune cell abundance comparison across subgroups using the indicated immune analysis tools across four independent iCCA cohorts. Circle color and size represent log 2 fold change and p value, respectively. (B) Boxplots of CD66b + neutrophils, CD68 + macrophages, CD3 + T cells, CD20 + B cells, and αSMA + fibroblasts across subgroups (Mann-Whitney U test). (C) Heatmap of immune signatures and checkpoint expression summarized as mean Z scores per subgroup across four cohorts. ∗FDR < 0.05; ∗∗FDR < 0.01; ∗∗∗FDR < 0.001. (D) Heatmap of Spearman correlations between chemokine expression and neutrophil infiltration. IHC, immunohistochemistry. (E) Boxplot comparing CXCL5 expression across subgroups in the Fu-iCCA cohort (Mann-Whitney U test). (F) Dot heatmap of chemokine gene expression across major cell types in Xue’s scRNA-seq dataset. (G) Boxplots of average CXCL5 expression in tumor cells and macrophages across subgroups (Mann-Whitney U test). (H) Western blot validating CXCL5 knockdown and overexpression efficiency in RBE and HuCCT1 cells. (I) Quantification of migrated neutrophils in transwell assays co-cultured with modified RBE and HuCCT1 cells ( n = 4 replicates per group; mean ± SD; Student’s t test). (J) Western blot analysis of CXCL5 overexpression in KTP cells. (K) Tumor growth curves of mice injected with control or CXCL5-overexpressing KTP cells ( n = 6 per group; mean ± SEM; Student’s t test). (L) Proportion and number of infiltrated neutrophils in control and CXCL5-overexpressing KTP tumors ( n = 6 per group; Student’s t test). ∗ p < 0.05; ∗∗ p < 0.01; ∗∗∗ p < 0.001. See also and and .

    Article Snippet: A CXCL5 neutralizing antibody (R&D Systems, AF254) was added at 5 μg/mL.

    Techniques: Comparison, MANN-WHITNEY, Expressing, Immunohistochemistry, Gene Expression, Western Blot, Knockdown, Over Expression, Cell Culture, Modification, Injection, Control

    Multi-omics analyses have revealed YAP1-driven immunosuppressive cellular communities in GC (A) Workflow of spatial transcriptomic profiling of GC specimens ( n = 17). (B) Classification of tumor spots in spatial transcriptome slides based on H&E staining and gene expression profiles. (C) Spatial feature plots illustrating YAP1 expression and the distribution of cell clusters in sample 1. (D) Abundance of cell types in spots with high versus low YAP1 expression, with differences tested by two-tailed t tests. Green p values indicate enrichment in YAP1 Low spots, and red p values indicate enrichment in YAP1 High spots. Cohen’s d applied to standardized differences in means of cell types between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High spots. (E) Overview of YAP1 expression analysis and clinical correlation in FFPE samples from 253 GC patients (cohort 4). (F) Quantitative comparison of CD8 + , CD4 + , and FOXP3 + immune cell densities between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High tumors in cohort 4 (Mann-Whitney U test; Spearman correlation). (G) Representative multiplex immunofluorescence (mIF) images of YAP1 (green), CD68 (red), SPP1 (yellow), and panCK (white) with DAPI (blue) and quantification of SPP1 + macrophage density relative to YAP1 H-scores. Scale bars, 100 μm. (H) Correlation heatmap of YAP1 and chemokine gene expression in tumor cells from cohort 1 scRNA-seq data. (I) Visualization of spatial transcriptomic slides showing co-expression of YAP1 (yellow) with CXCL3/5/8 and CCL20 (blue), with spots of co-expression indicated in green. (J) Comparative analysis of CXCL3/5/8 and CCL20 expression between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High spots within the tumor regions (Mann-Whitney U test). (K) Representative mIF images showing co-localization of YAP1 (green), CXCL5 (red), and panCK (white) with DAPI (blue) in tumor regions, accompanied by single-cell correlation analysis between YAP1 and CXCL5 mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) values. Scale bars, 100 μm. (L) Experimental schematic illustrating the co-culture setup of YAP1-overexpressing or YAP1-knockout HGC-27 cells with THP-1-derived macrophages, with selected conditions including CXCL5 neutralization, CXCR2 inhibition, and recombinant CXCL5 treatment. (M) Western blot analysis of CXCL5 protein expression in control, YAP1 OE, and YAP1 KO gastric cancer cell lines. (N) ELISA quantification of CXCL5 secretion in conditioned media from control, YAP1 OE, and YAP1 KO cells. (O) FACS quantification of SPP1 + CD68 + macrophages following co-culture with tumor cells under the indicated conditions ( YAP1 OE/KO, CXCL5 neutralization, CXCR2 inhibition [SB225002], and recombinant CXCL5 supplementation) (see also C).

    Journal: Cell Reports Medicine

    Article Title: Enhancing gastric cancer immunotherapy: Insights from multi-omics analysis and innovations in photodynamic-chemotherapy nanoplatforms

    doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2026.102635

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Multi-omics analyses have revealed YAP1-driven immunosuppressive cellular communities in GC (A) Workflow of spatial transcriptomic profiling of GC specimens ( n = 17). (B) Classification of tumor spots in spatial transcriptome slides based on H&E staining and gene expression profiles. (C) Spatial feature plots illustrating YAP1 expression and the distribution of cell clusters in sample 1. (D) Abundance of cell types in spots with high versus low YAP1 expression, with differences tested by two-tailed t tests. Green p values indicate enrichment in YAP1 Low spots, and red p values indicate enrichment in YAP1 High spots. Cohen’s d applied to standardized differences in means of cell types between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High spots. (E) Overview of YAP1 expression analysis and clinical correlation in FFPE samples from 253 GC patients (cohort 4). (F) Quantitative comparison of CD8 + , CD4 + , and FOXP3 + immune cell densities between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High tumors in cohort 4 (Mann-Whitney U test; Spearman correlation). (G) Representative multiplex immunofluorescence (mIF) images of YAP1 (green), CD68 (red), SPP1 (yellow), and panCK (white) with DAPI (blue) and quantification of SPP1 + macrophage density relative to YAP1 H-scores. Scale bars, 100 μm. (H) Correlation heatmap of YAP1 and chemokine gene expression in tumor cells from cohort 1 scRNA-seq data. (I) Visualization of spatial transcriptomic slides showing co-expression of YAP1 (yellow) with CXCL3/5/8 and CCL20 (blue), with spots of co-expression indicated in green. (J) Comparative analysis of CXCL3/5/8 and CCL20 expression between YAP1 Low and YAP1 High spots within the tumor regions (Mann-Whitney U test). (K) Representative mIF images showing co-localization of YAP1 (green), CXCL5 (red), and panCK (white) with DAPI (blue) in tumor regions, accompanied by single-cell correlation analysis between YAP1 and CXCL5 mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) values. Scale bars, 100 μm. (L) Experimental schematic illustrating the co-culture setup of YAP1-overexpressing or YAP1-knockout HGC-27 cells with THP-1-derived macrophages, with selected conditions including CXCL5 neutralization, CXCR2 inhibition, and recombinant CXCL5 treatment. (M) Western blot analysis of CXCL5 protein expression in control, YAP1 OE, and YAP1 KO gastric cancer cell lines. (N) ELISA quantification of CXCL5 secretion in conditioned media from control, YAP1 OE, and YAP1 KO cells. (O) FACS quantification of SPP1 + CD68 + macrophages following co-culture with tumor cells under the indicated conditions ( YAP1 OE/KO, CXCL5 neutralization, CXCR2 inhibition [SB225002], and recombinant CXCL5 supplementation) (see also C).

    Article Snippet: CXCL5 Protein, Human , MCE , HY-P7158.

    Techniques: Biomarker Discovery, Staining, Gene Expression, Expressing, Two Tailed Test, Comparison, MANN-WHITNEY, Multiplex Assay, Immunofluorescence, Single Cell, Fluorescence, Co-Culture Assay, Knock-Out, Derivative Assay, Neutralization, Inhibition, Recombinant, Western Blot, Control, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay

    Efficient internalization of M@O-VNPs triggered dual ICD effects in vitro (A) Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) images and FACS analysis showing time-dependent uptake of FITC-labeled O-VNPs and M@O-VNPs by HGC-27 cells at 0.5, 2, and 4 h ( n = 3, scale bars, 20 μm). F-actin is labeled with phalloidin (red). (B) Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images of HGC-27 cells 1 h after the uptake of O-VNPs and M@O-VNPs (scale bars, 1 μm). (C) Immunofluorescence images demonstrating YAP1 inhibition in HGC-27 cells after 24-h treatment with PBS, HMSN, VP, photoactivated VP, M@O-VNPs, and photoactivated M@O-VNPs. YAP1 is labeled in green, and F-actin is labeled in gray (scale bars, 20 μm). (D) CCK8 assay results showed the inhibition rates of HMSN, O-VNPs, M@O-VNPs, and photoactivated M@O-VNPs in HGC-27 and HIEC-6 cells after 24 h of treatment ( n = 3). (E) FACS analysis of apoptosis/necrosis in HGC-27 cells after 24-h treatment with PBS, free OXA, free OXA plus VP, and M@O-VNPs for 24 h, with and without laser irradiation, using Annexin V-FITC and PI staining ( n = 3). (F) Detection of reactive oxygen species (ROS) production using the DCFH-DA probe in HGC-27 cells treated with PBS, HMSN, free VP, free VP plus OXA, and M@O-VNPs for 24 h, with and without laser irradiation ( n = 3, scale bars = 50 μm). (G) CLSM analysis of immunogenic cell death (ICD) markers calreticulin (CRT) and HMGB1 in HGC-27 cells treated with PBS, HMSN, free VP, free VP plus OXA, and M@O-VNPs for 24 h, with and without laser irradiation ( n = 3, scale bars, 20 μm). (H) Schematic illustration of the Transwell co-culture system, in which murine splenocytes were incubated with YTN-16 GC cells for 48 h under different treatment conditions. (I–M) FACS analysis of immune cell subsets in mouse-spleen-derived cells co-cultured with YTN16 murine GC cells for 48 h. YTN16 cells were pretreated with different formulations for 24 h before co-culture. Quantified populations included mature DCs, CD8 + effector T cells, CD4 + T helper cells, Treg cells, and SPP1 + macrophages ( n = 3, two-tailed t test). Gating strategy and representative plots are shown in . ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001, ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001. (N) Measurement of CXCL5 secretion levels in co-culture supernatants under indicated treatments ( n = 3, two-tailed t test). ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001. (O) Schematic model depicting how photoactivated M@O-VNPs inhibit YAP1 expression, reduce CXCL5-CXCR2 signaling, and modulate SPP1 expression within the tumor-immune microenvironment.

    Journal: Cell Reports Medicine

    Article Title: Enhancing gastric cancer immunotherapy: Insights from multi-omics analysis and innovations in photodynamic-chemotherapy nanoplatforms

    doi: 10.1016/j.xcrm.2026.102635

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Efficient internalization of M@O-VNPs triggered dual ICD effects in vitro (A) Confocal laser scanning microscopy (CLSM) images and FACS analysis showing time-dependent uptake of FITC-labeled O-VNPs and M@O-VNPs by HGC-27 cells at 0.5, 2, and 4 h ( n = 3, scale bars, 20 μm). F-actin is labeled with phalloidin (red). (B) Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images of HGC-27 cells 1 h after the uptake of O-VNPs and M@O-VNPs (scale bars, 1 μm). (C) Immunofluorescence images demonstrating YAP1 inhibition in HGC-27 cells after 24-h treatment with PBS, HMSN, VP, photoactivated VP, M@O-VNPs, and photoactivated M@O-VNPs. YAP1 is labeled in green, and F-actin is labeled in gray (scale bars, 20 μm). (D) CCK8 assay results showed the inhibition rates of HMSN, O-VNPs, M@O-VNPs, and photoactivated M@O-VNPs in HGC-27 and HIEC-6 cells after 24 h of treatment ( n = 3). (E) FACS analysis of apoptosis/necrosis in HGC-27 cells after 24-h treatment with PBS, free OXA, free OXA plus VP, and M@O-VNPs for 24 h, with and without laser irradiation, using Annexin V-FITC and PI staining ( n = 3). (F) Detection of reactive oxygen species (ROS) production using the DCFH-DA probe in HGC-27 cells treated with PBS, HMSN, free VP, free VP plus OXA, and M@O-VNPs for 24 h, with and without laser irradiation ( n = 3, scale bars = 50 μm). (G) CLSM analysis of immunogenic cell death (ICD) markers calreticulin (CRT) and HMGB1 in HGC-27 cells treated with PBS, HMSN, free VP, free VP plus OXA, and M@O-VNPs for 24 h, with and without laser irradiation ( n = 3, scale bars, 20 μm). (H) Schematic illustration of the Transwell co-culture system, in which murine splenocytes were incubated with YTN-16 GC cells for 48 h under different treatment conditions. (I–M) FACS analysis of immune cell subsets in mouse-spleen-derived cells co-cultured with YTN16 murine GC cells for 48 h. YTN16 cells were pretreated with different formulations for 24 h before co-culture. Quantified populations included mature DCs, CD8 + effector T cells, CD4 + T helper cells, Treg cells, and SPP1 + macrophages ( n = 3, two-tailed t test). Gating strategy and representative plots are shown in . ∗ p < 0.05, ∗∗ p < 0.01, ∗∗∗ p < 0.001, ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001. (N) Measurement of CXCL5 secretion levels in co-culture supernatants under indicated treatments ( n = 3, two-tailed t test). ∗∗∗∗ p < 0.0001. (O) Schematic model depicting how photoactivated M@O-VNPs inhibit YAP1 expression, reduce CXCL5-CXCR2 signaling, and modulate SPP1 expression within the tumor-immune microenvironment.

    Article Snippet: CXCL5 Protein, Human , MCE , HY-P7158.

    Techniques: In Vitro, Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy, Labeling, Transmission Assay, Electron Microscopy, Immunofluorescence, Inhibition, CCK-8 Assay, Irradiation, Staining, Co-Culture Assay, Incubation, Derivative Assay, Cell Culture, Two Tailed Test, Expressing