Table 1.

The role of OX40/OX40L in the engraftment of MHC class I or II-disparate T-cell-depleted donor BM grafts

GroupTBIDayNo.Donor,
% (SD)
Host,
% (SD)
B6-CD45.1→bm12      
 Irrelevant mAb 5.0 115 15 88 (4) 12 (4) 
 αOX40 mAb 5.0 115 15 16 (2)* 87 (2)* 
 αOX40L mAb 5.0 115 15 97 (1)* 6 (1) 
 Irrelevant mAb 4.5 120 13 81 (7) 20 (6) 
 αOX40L mAb 4.5 120 14 94 (1) 10 (1) 
B6-CD45.1→bm1      
 Irrelevant mAb 5.0 97 15 88 (6) 12 (5)  
 αOX40 mAb 5.0 97 15 68 (9) 33 (9) 
 Irrelevant mAb 4.5 100 15 79 (8) 22 (7)  
 αOX40L mAb 4.5 100 15 65 (10) 36 (10) 
GroupTBIDayNo.Donor,
% (SD)
Host,
% (SD)
B6-CD45.1→bm12      
 Irrelevant mAb 5.0 115 15 88 (4) 12 (4) 
 αOX40 mAb 5.0 115 15 16 (2)* 87 (2)* 
 αOX40L mAb 5.0 115 15 97 (1)* 6 (1) 
 Irrelevant mAb 4.5 120 13 81 (7) 20 (6) 
 αOX40L mAb 4.5 120 14 94 (1) 10 (1) 
B6-CD45.1→bm1      
 Irrelevant mAb 5.0 97 15 88 (6) 12 (5)  
 αOX40 mAb 5.0 97 15 68 (9) 33 (9) 
 Irrelevant mAb 4.5 100 15 79 (8) 22 (7)  
 αOX40L mAb 4.5 100 15 65 (10) 36 (10) 

B6-CD45.1 recipients (n = 15 per group) were sublethally irradiated with TBI doses, as indicated, on day −1 and then given 0.7 to 1 × 107 TCD BM from bm1 or bm12 donors and either irrelevant IgG, anti-OX40, or anti-OX40L mAb as described in ‘Materials and methods.” On the indicated day after BMT, all surviving recipients were phenotyped to determine the donor or host origin of peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Values shown are mean percentages. The standard deviation of the mean is listed in parentheses.

*

P ≤ .05 versus irrelevant mAb controls.

.05 < P ≤ .10 versus irrelevant mAb controls.