Search Advanced

AIMS Allergy and Immunology

2018, Volume 2, Issue 1: 24-44. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2018.1.24
Previous Article Next Article
Review Topical Sections

Contributions of immune cell populations in the maintenance, progression, and therapeutic modalities of glioma

  • Department of Pharmacological Sciences, BioMedical Sciences, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY, USA
  • Immunotherapies are becoming a promising strategy for malignant disease. Selectively directing host immune responses to target cancerous tissue is a milestone of human health care. The roles of the innate and adaptive immune systems in both cancer progression and elimination are now being realized. Defining the immune cell environment and identifying the contributions of each sub-population of these cells has lead to an understanding of the immunotherapeutic processes, and demonstrated the potential of the immune system to drive cancer shrinkage and sustained immunity against disease. Poorly treated diseases, such as high-grade glioma, suffer from lack of therapeutic efficacy and rapid progression. Immunotherapeutic success in other solid malignancies, such as melanoma, now provides the principals for which this treatment paradigm can be adapted for primary brain cancers. The central nervous system is complex, and relative contributions of immune sub-populations to high grade glioma progression are not fully characterized. Here, we summarize recent research in both animal and humans which add to the knowledge base of how innate and adaptive immune cells contribute to glioma progression, and outline work which has demonstrated their potential to elicit anti-tumorigenic responses. Additionally, we highlight Neuropilin 1, a cell surface receptor protein, describe its signaling functions in the context of immunity, and point to its potential to slow glioma progression.

    Citation: Michael D. Caponegro, Jeremy Tetsuo Miyauchi, Stella E. Tsirka. Contributions of immune cell populations in the maintenance, progression, and therapeutic modalities of glioma[J]. AIMS Allergy and Immunology, 2018, 2(1): 24-44. doi: 10.3934/Allergy.2018.1.24

    Related Papers:

    [1] Akeel A. AL-saedi, Jalil Rashidinia . Application of the B-spline Galerkin approach for approximating the time-fractional Burger's equation. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(7): 4248-4265. doi: 10.3934/era.2023216
    [2] Lijie Liu, Xiaojing Wei, Leilei Wei . A fully discrete local discontinuous Galerkin method based on generalized numerical fluxes to variable-order time-fractional reaction-diffusion problem with the Caputo fractional derivative. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(9): 5701-5715. doi: 10.3934/era.2023289
    [3] Yunxia Niu, Chaoran Qi, Yao Zhang, Wahidullah Niazi . Numerical analysis and simulation of the compact difference scheme for the pseudo-parabolic Burgers' equation. Electronic Research Archive, 2025, 33(3): 1763-1791. doi: 10.3934/era.2025080
    [4] Victor Ginting . An adjoint-based a posteriori analysis of numerical approximation of Richards equation. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(5): 3405-3427. doi: 10.3934/era.2021045
    [5] Li Tian, Ziqiang Wang, Junying Cao . A high-order numerical scheme for right Caputo fractional differential equations with uniform accuracy. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(10): 3825-3854. doi: 10.3934/era.2022195
    [6] Chang Hou, Hu Chen . Stability and pointwise-in-time convergence analysis of a finite difference scheme for a 2D nonlinear multi-term subdiffusion equation. Electronic Research Archive, 2025, 33(3): 1476-1489. doi: 10.3934/era.2025069
    [7] Min Li . Long-wavelength limit for the Green–Naghdi equations. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(7): 2700-2718. doi: 10.3934/era.2022138
    [8] Yihui Xu, Benoumran Telli, Mohammed Said Souid, Sina Etemad, Jiafa Xu, Shahram Rezapour . Stability on a boundary problem with RL-Fractional derivative in the sense of Atangana-Baleanu of variable-order. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(1): 134-159. doi: 10.3934/era.2024007
    [9] Yue Feng, Yujie Liu, Ruishu Wang, Shangyou Zhang . A conforming discontinuous Galerkin finite element method on rectangular partitions. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(3): 2375-2389. doi: 10.3934/era.2020120
    [10] Jingyun Lv, Xiaoyan Lu . Convergence of finite element solution of stochastic Burgers equation. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(3): 1663-1691. doi: 10.3934/era.2024076
  • Immunotherapies are becoming a promising strategy for malignant disease. Selectively directing host immune responses to target cancerous tissue is a milestone of human health care. The roles of the innate and adaptive immune systems in both cancer progression and elimination are now being realized. Defining the immune cell environment and identifying the contributions of each sub-population of these cells has lead to an understanding of the immunotherapeutic processes, and demonstrated the potential of the immune system to drive cancer shrinkage and sustained immunity against disease. Poorly treated diseases, such as high-grade glioma, suffer from lack of therapeutic efficacy and rapid progression. Immunotherapeutic success in other solid malignancies, such as melanoma, now provides the principals for which this treatment paradigm can be adapted for primary brain cancers. The central nervous system is complex, and relative contributions of immune sub-populations to high grade glioma progression are not fully characterized. Here, we summarize recent research in both animal and humans which add to the knowledge base of how innate and adaptive immune cells contribute to glioma progression, and outline work which has demonstrated their potential to elicit anti-tumorigenic responses. Additionally, we highlight Neuropilin 1, a cell surface receptor protein, describe its signaling functions in the context of immunity, and point to its potential to slow glioma progression.


    1.   Introduction

    The World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome corona-virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), a pandemic on March 11, 2020 [1]. Currently, strains of the virus have been reported, suggesting possible multi-point transmission of the SARS-CoV-2 [2],[3]. In addition to the health crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the financial and social systems of most countries and pushed more populations in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) below the poverty line, thus exacerbating wealth inequality [4],[5]. Sadly, the current pandemic is predicted to impose more morbidity and mortality burdens while simultaneously disrupting an already fragile society and world economy [4]–[6]. As with past outbreaks, the novel nature of the current coronavirus led experts to recommend non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPI) as the most effective public health interventions against COVID-19, as no definitive therapy existed for its treatment [7],[8].

    Nigeria reported its first confirmed case on February 27th, 2020, the first reported case in sub-Saharan Africa [9]–[11]. As of March 31st, 2022, of over 11.3 COVID-19 cases (with 251260 deaths) reported in Africa, Nigeria accounts for 255415 cases which are approximately 2.3% of the continent’ COVID-19 burden [12]. The Nigerian Government preemptively announced a series of strict measures, including the early adoption of a lockdown (in early March), followed by an instant nationwide public awareness campaign about COVID–19 prevention and control measures [7]. The lockdown represented a solution to a crisis for which Nigeria was ill-equipped from a public health perspective. Equally, the lockdown was a crucial measure to buy some time to prepare for the surge of COVID-19 cases. On a positive note, the age brackets in Nigeria have been hypothesized as one factor responsible for the low mortality rate [10]. Nigeria has a relatively young population, with 62% of Nigeria's population being younger than 35 years, while only 7% are older than 65 [11]. This age factor could have spared Nigeria high mortality from a disease that poses a greater danger to the elderly.

    The announcement of a safe and effective COVID-19 vaccine was arguably the most significant development since the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic. Vaccines are safe, cost-friendly, and effective in reducing or eradicating diseases. However, despite the ample scientific evidence supporting vaccines' safety and efficacy, the spread and normalization of myths and anti-vaccine information have greatly threatened Africa's mass vaccination campaign [8]. The reluctance or refusal to vaccinate despite availability of vaccines can be defined as vaccine hesitancy, according to the WHO, is one of the top ten threats to health and well-being in 2019 [13]. Sadly, these threats are heightened by misinformation and the spread of fake news and can reverse progress in tackling vaccine-preventable diseases. Globally, the number of deaths due to vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs) has significantly reduced in the past few decades. Except for cancer and tuberculosis, the number of deaths from VPDs declined from 4.1 m in 1990 (9% of the total death) to 2–3 million in 2010 (5% of the total death) [14]. A further 1.5 million deaths could be avoided if global coverage of vaccinations is improved [13]. Vaccination controls mortality, morbidity, and complications associated with infectious diseases; thus, expanding robust and routine vaccination programs is one fundamental way to reduce the incidence of infectious diseases such as COVID-19 [8],[15]. Unfortunately, the accelerated pace of vaccine development has further heightened public anxieties [16]. This could also compromise COVID-19 vaccine acceptance in a country that in 2003 witnessed one of the worst ever situations of vaccine hesitancy in Africa during the polio vaccination program [8],[17],[18].

    A global survey showed that 65.2% of participants from Nigeria would be willing to get vaccinated against COVID-19 if a vaccine were available [6]. However, this survey was carried out ten months ago, and a lot has changed since then regarding the vast and evolving range of misinformation and conspiracy theories circulating. This misinformation could affect public confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine, resulting in an acute increase in the levels of vaccine hesitancy. Therefore, it is crucial to gauge Nigerians' current levels of willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and determine correlations between vaccine hesitancy and/or acceptance. Hence, this study's objectives were to identify how adults in Nigeria are willing to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and examine whether socio-demographic factors and attitudes toward COVID-19 are associated with their acceptance or refusal of the COVID-19 vaccine. This study also attempted to understand the reasons for COVID-19 vaccine refusals among the general Nigerian population.

    2.   Methods

    2.1.   Study design and data collection

    This cross-sectional study was developed using an anonymous online-based questionnaire. Recruitment of respondents was performed using targeted advertising on social media platforms such as WhatsApp, Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, and Twitter. Also, to obtain more respondents, our social media networks were urged to share the internet-based questionnaire with their networks, and data were collected using Google Forms. Eligible participants in the online survey were expected to be 18 years of age or older, a Nigerian citizen and resident in Nigeria, read and understand English with access to the internet. The COVID-19 vaccine acceptance rate was evaluated using established questionnaires [6],[19], and three independent reviewers undertook a pretest to assess readability, comprehensibility, and validity. However, the questionnaire utilized in this study was tailored to be short, concise, and easy to understand.

    2.2.   Analytical measures

    A structured questionnaire was developed in the English language to collect data. This questionnaire comprised of 8 questions under four main themes, as follows: (1) demographics, which surveyed participants' socio-demographic information; (2) attitudes toward COVID-19; (3) willingness to accept a COVID-19 vaccine, and (4) reason for not accepting a COVID-19 vaccine. The questionnaire was pre-validated by three independent reviewers, and a pre-test study was conducted with four individuals. Demographics such as personal details, including age, gender, level of education, and average monthly income, were collected. The overall attitude towards COVID-19 was measured using a one-item question, “Do you think COVID-19 is real?”—with a Yes or No option. Among the variables assessed was the willingness of respondents to receive a COVID-19 vaccine when it is widely available in Nigeria. To be more specific, participants were asked: “Will you accept the COVID-19 vaccine if it is generally available in Nigeria?”, and the three potential answers were “Yes”, “No” and “Don't know.” Afterwards, No and Don't Know responses were considered No to dichotomize the acceptance variable during statistical analysis. To gain insight into the reason for vaccine refusal and hesitancy, participants who answered No or Don't know to the question about willingness to accept a COVID-19 vaccine were asked two more questions (i) “Why won't you accept COVID-19 vaccine?”, and the six potential answers were “religious reasons”, “lack of trust in the government”, “I will contract COVID-19 if I take the vaccine”, “I don't the vaccine is safe”, “no much information about the vaccine”, or “other: which allowed the participants to input their reason for COVID-19 vaccine refusal or hesitancy”; and (ii) “what will encourage you to accept a COVID-19 vaccine?”, and the potential answers were “I will accept COVID-19 vaccine if more people take it”, “I will accept COVID-19 vaccine if more information about the vaccine is given”, or “Nothing will make me accept COVID-19 vaccine.”

    2.3.   Statistical analysis

    Descriptive statistics were used to outline the demographic characteristics of the sample population. Univariable analyses of the participants' demographic characteristics and willingness of respondents to accept COVID-19 in Nigeria were carried out using the chi-square tests. Furthermore, we conducted univariable logistic regression to compute odds ratios (OR) and the 95% confidence interval (CI) and corresponding P-values for the association between each socio-demographic characteristic and vaccine acceptance. 2-tailed statistical tests were used in this study, with a P-value of <0.05 considered statistical significance. Statistical analyses were conducted using SAS JMP Statistical Discovery™ Software version 14.3 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, USA).

    2.4.   Ethical consideration

    This study followed all the ethical protocols involved in conducting studies involving human participants recommended by the National Health Research Ethics Committee of Nigeria, Federal Minister of Health. The ethical approval consent for this study was obtained from Abia State Teaching University Hospital Ethics and Research Committee with approval number/ID ABSUTH/MAC/117/VOL.11/74. Participants were aware of the purpose of the study and provided informed consent before accessing the questionnaire. Respondents were also provided with information that stated their participation was voluntary, and confidentiality and anonymity were also ensured.

    3.   Results

    3.1.   Socio-demographic characteristics of participants

    The respondents' characteristics and a summary of the survey questions are listed in Table 1. Of the total 617 respondents recruited in the survey, 56.8% were between 25 and 54 years old. Of all participants, 49% were male, 51% were female, 30.7% of all participants earned more than $134 per month. In comparison, most of our respondents had received a university degree (62%), followed by 17.3% who are still undergraduates.

    Table 1.  Socio-demographic characteristics of the study population and breakdown of the COVID-19 vaccine question (n =618).
    Characteristics N % Study population
    Age group
    18–24 182 29.4%
    25–54 351 56.8%
    55–64 73 11.8%
    65+ 12 1.9%
    Gender
    Male 303 49%
    Female 315 51%
    Income level per month in Naira (USD eqv)
    Less than 10000 ($26) 51 8.3%
    11000–30000 ($28–78) 90 14.6%
    31000–50000 ($81–131) 159 25.7%
    51000+ ($134) 190 30.7%
    No answer 128 20.7%
    Education level
    Less than high school 27 4.3%
    High school 101 16.3%
    Undergraduate 107 17.3%
    Bachelor's degree or above 383 62%
    Accept COVID-19 vaccine if available in Nigeria
    Yes 272 44%
    No 206 33.3%
    Don't know 140 22.7%
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    3.2.   Health belief

    As shown in Figure 1 significant proportion of the participants, 91.7% (n = 567), believed COVID-19 was not a hoax. However, surprisingly, a few participants, 8.3% (n = 51), agreed that there was no COVID-19 in Nigeria. Furthermore, 46.2% (n = 160) of the participants reported that they would only receive the COVID-19 vaccine if given adequate information about the vaccine, 35.3% (n = 122) reported that nothing would persuade them to accept the COVID-19 vaccine, and 18.5% (n = 64) reported that they would only take the vaccine if taken by many in public.

    Figure 1.  Perception of COVID-19 in Nigeria (n = 618).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    3.3.   Factors associated with acceptance and non-acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine

    Factors associated with the willingness of respondents to accept COVID-19 in Nigeria are presented in Table 2. In total, 44% (n = 272) of respondents reported their willingness to get vaccinated against COVID-19, while 33.3% (n = 206) confirmed that they are unwilling to receive a COVID-19 vaccine and 22.7% (n = 140) reported that they are unsure. The major reason for the non-acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine among the respondents is a lack of trust in the government 47.1% (n = 163), followed by the belief that the vaccine is not safe 19.4% (n = 67), and not enough information about the vaccine 13.6% (n = 49). Other reasons for COVID-19 vaccine refusal were fear of contracting COVID-19 through the vaccine 5.5% (n = 21) and religious reasons 3.75% (n = 13) as shown in Figure 2. Our results revealed that gender (χ2 = 8.95, P-value = 0.011), educational level (χ2 = 30.62, P-value < 0.001) and age (χ2 = 14.68, P-value = 0.023) are statistically associatied with with willingness to accept COVID-19 vaccine. We also observed that males were significantly associated with lower odds of accepting vaccines than females (OR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.46 –0.88). However, income level, educational status, and age were not significantly associated with willingness to accept the COVID-19 vaccine (Table 2).

    Table 2.  Factors associated with willingness of respondents to accept COVID-19 in Nigeria.
    Characteristics Total (N = 618) n (%) Yes (N = 272) n (%) No (N = 346) n (%) χ2 P-value OR (95% CI)
    Age group 14.68 0.023*
    18–24 (Ref) 182(29.4%) 73 (40.1%) 109 (59.9%) 1.00
    25–54 351(56.8%) 159 (45.3%) 192 (54.7%) 0.80 (0.56–1.16)
    55–64 73 (11.8%) 34 (46.6%) 39 (53.4%) 0.76 (0.44–1.32)
    65+ 12 (1.9%) 6 (50.0%) 6 (50.0%) 0.66 (0.20–2.15)
    Gender 8.95 0.011*
    Female (Ref) 315 (51%) 122 (38.7%) 193 (61.2%) 1.00
    Male 303 (49%) 150 (49.5%) 153 (50%) 0.64 (0.46–0.88)*
    Income level per month in Naira (USD eqv) 14.83 0.068
    11000–30000 ($28–78) (Ref) 90 (14.6%) 38 (42.2%) 52 (57.8%) 1.00
    Less than 10000 ($26) 51 (8.3%) 24 (47%) 27 (52.9%) 0.82 (0.41–1.64)
    31000–50000 ($81–131) 159 (25.7%) 71 (44.7%) 88 (55.3%) 0.90 (0.53–1.52)
    51000+ ($134) 190 (30.7%) 89 (46.8%) 101 (53.2%) 0.82 (0.49–1.37)
    No answer 128 (20.7%) 50 (39.0%) 78 (61.0%) 1.14 (0.65–1.97)
    Education level 30.62 <0.001*
    Less than high school (Ref) 27 (4.3%) 6 (22.2%) 21 (77.8%) 1.00
    High school 101 (16.3%) 35 (34.7%) 66 (65.3%) 0.62 (0.22–1.72)
    Undergraduate 107 (17.3%) 41 (38.3%) 66 (61.7%) 0.53 (0.19–1.46)
    Bachelor's degree or above 383 (62%) 190 (49.6%) 193 (50.3%) 0.33 (0.13–0.87)

    Note: OR: Odds Ratio; CI: Confidence Interval. *Significant at P < 0.05 or when 95% CI does not include 1 for odds ratios.

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 2.  Reasons for the unwillingness of the adult population to accept COVID-19 vaccine in Nigeria (n = 346).
    DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

    4.   Discussion

    Like any other vaccination program, the success of the current COVID-19 vaccination program depends on the level of acceptance. A low rate of vaccination coverage due to non-acceptance directly correlates with not achieving herd immunity and exposure to the most vulnerable population. As a result, it is critical to understand the people's intention to accept the COVID-19 vaccine, thus, giving time to design and carry out targeted public health interventions and awareness campaigns to inform the public about the importance of vaccination. After all, as demonstrated in this study, 46.2% (n = 160) of the participants reported that they would only receive the COVID-19 vaccine if given adequate information about the vaccine. This suggests that hesitancy towards COVID-19 vaccine can be swayed towards acceptance if presented with the correct information. In this context, the aim of this nationwide cross-sectional survey conducted in Nigeria was to evaluate the vaccination intents of the general adult population and factors that might affect acceptance, refusal, and hesitancy. Previous studies [6],[20] in the area of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance and hesitancy have been carried out. However, the fact that vaccine decisions are multifactorial [8],[21], and can alter over time makes this study relevant. Its results are expected to influence public engagement measures taken by public health officials.

    Findings from our study revealed that a significant proportion of individuals, 56% were unwilling or unsure about receiving a COVID-19 vaccine, and only 44% stated that they would get vaccinated. Based on the estimates of the reproduction number (R0) [22],[23] or through vaccination, this percentage of people willing to get vaccinated is not strong enough to achieve herd immunity. Comparing the acceptance rate of our study with that of similar studies conducted in China (97%), Brazil (88%), Australia (88%), India (87%), South Africa (64%), Russia (54%), Poland (56%), Hungary (56%), and France (59%), according to a survey by World Economic Forum's Ipsos involving nearly 20000 adults [24], and or other European countries (ranged from 62 to 80%) [25], it seems like Nigerians are more hesitant towards COVID-19 vaccine compared to other study populations. Furthermore, studies in Indonesia [26] and Malaysia [27] reported 93.3% and 94.3% acceptance rates, respectively. Our “respondents” willingness rate is higher than reported in the Democratic Republic of Congo [28]. Contrarily, the two previous studies focused on Nigerian populations reported willingness rates of 74% [20] and 65.22% [6]. These contrasting findings further suggest that vaccination decision is an evolving phenomenon that changes over time, and if rates of acceptance remain low, the COVID-19 pandemic will continue to stifle public health systems and the country's economy. As an antidote, the Nigerian public health officials need to design and implement an awareness campaign urgently to help boost acceptance rates.

    Higher levels of education and low monthly income were also associated with high vaccine acceptance rates. These findings align with studies in the UK [29] and Australia [30]. Among demographically defined groups, the willingness rate was least among those with lower education, while a study in Greece [31] demonstrated the opposite. Therefore, while its imperative to design effective vaccine communication strategies, it is crucial to carefully consider the general literacy level of the subpopulations [21], as well as identify traditionally and locally trusted means of communication [8] that go beyond simply voicing that vaccines are safe and effective. Interestingly, as drivers of vaccine hesitancy rely greatly on both belief systems and personal experiences [31], it will be more effective to boost vaccine literacy and acceptance by directly addressing community-specific concerns or misconceptions, socio-cultural issues, religious or philosophical beliefs that breed distrust in vaccination programs. Although researchers have identified behavioural insights, culturally appropriate and evidence-based communications are promising interventions for building confidence and reducing vaccine hesitancy in different contexts [32],[33]. Other promising tools have been developed primarily for high-income countries [34]. However, these tools will require careful adjustment to make them suitable for use in African nations. Therefore, it is paramount to adapt and validate such existing vaccine hesitancy measurement tools or develop new tools capable of monitoring COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy across African countries, enhancing the comparability of research findings, and facilitating a more robust evidence-based intervention.

    Generally, women in this study were less likely to accept vaccines than men; however, this association was not strong. This finding could help the Nigerian government, health professionals, policymakers, and non-governmental organizations to target interventions around COVID-19 vaccination programs effectively. Furthermore, about 56% of our study population showed unwillingness in accepting the COVID-19 vaccine. Comparatively, these results were significantly greater than what was reported in Russia (47%), Poland (45%), Hungary (44%), France (41%), South Africa (36%), Sweden (33%), United States (33%), Germany (33%), Italy (33%), Brazil (12%), Australia (12%), India (13%), Malaysia (15%), UK (15%), Saudi Arabia (16%), South Korea (16%), Peru (21%), China (3%), and Canada (24%) according to a recent survey by World Economic Forum's Ipsos involving nearly 20000 adults on whether they will take COVID-19 vaccine or not when it is available [24].

    Our findings revealed that trust is not only an intrinsic component of a vaccination program but also a changeable factor in the successful uptake of a COVID-19 vaccine. Furthermore, our findings show that lack of trust in the government is strongly associated with vaccine refusal and can contribute to non-compliance of the public with recommended protocols. From our observation, the top three reasons for the non-acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine are lack of trust in the government, the belief that the vaccine is not safe, and concerns there is not enough information about the vaccine. Lessons from past infectious disease outbreaks have pointed out that one of the key contributors to disease control is trusted information and guidance [35]. However, its multifactorial, complex, and context-dependent characteristics would take more than building trust to adequately address vaccine hesitancy. Hence, it is equally important to address vaccine hesitancy simultaneously at federal, state, and local levels.

    As this study has shown, it is paramount that the government and public health officials adopt clear, consistent, and competent communication to build public confidence in the COVID-19 vaccination program. This includes, but is not limited to, using a simple linguistic approach to explaining how vaccines work and how they are developed, including regulatory approval based on safety and efficacy. In a similar vein, effective campaigns should be designed to carefully explain the COVID-19 vaccine's level of effectiveness, the required period for protection if double doses are required, and the significance of comprehensive coverage in achieving herd immunity. Above all, credible and culturally informed health communication would be influential in swaying the minds of the fence-sitters towards COVID-19 vaccine acceptance.

    5.   Limitations

    In interpreting the results of this current study, it is essential to consider some limitations. Firstly, our study used an online survey, involving only those who can read or write English and have access to the internet which may have resulted in sampling bias; hence, the results may not be an accurate representation of the wider population. One of the core disadvantages of online-based surveys is the generality and validity of results, which mandates a careful analysis and interpretation of the research findings [36],[37]. Our survey results show that participants between the ages of 24–54 are over-represented, while older adults aged 65 and above are under-represented. Secondly, the responses from this nationwide survey were focused on self-report. As a result, it may likely be subject to self-reporting bias and a likelihood of respondents choosing socially desirable responses. Further investigation using other methodologically appropriate tools is needed to conclusively assess vaccination willingness in different behavioural and sociocultural contexts.

    6.   Conclusions

    Contrary to previous studies conducted before the COVID-19 vaccine, this present study has shown that individual vaccination intention can change over time, particularly when a vaccine becomes available. Summarily in March 2021, more than half of the adult population surveyed reported being hesitant towards the Covid-19 vaccine. Women, younger people aged 18–24, and less educated individuals could be potential target groups for strategic interventions aiming to sway the public toward COVID-19 vaccination acceptance. These findings are expected to provide valuable insights to government agencies, public health officials, and health care workers to address the impact of vaccine hesitancy. Furthermore, this observation highlights the need to implement immediate awareness-raising measures to communicate and engage with the public toward COVID-19 vaccine acceptance.

    [1] Wen PY, Kesari S (2008) Malignant gliomas in adults. New Engl J Med 359: 492–507. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra0708126
    [2] Brennan C, Momota H, Hambardzumyan D, et al. (2009) Glioblastoma subclasses can be defined by activity among signal transduction pathways and associated genomic alterations. PLoS One 4: e7752. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0007752
    [3] Verhaak RG, Hoadley KA, Purdom E, et al. (2010) Integrated genomic analysis identifies clinically relevant subtypes of glioblastoma characterized by abnormalities in PDGFRA, IDH1, EGFR, and NF1. Cancer Cell 17: 98–110. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.12.020
    [4] Louis DN, Perry A, Reifenberger G, et al. (2016) The 2016 World Health Organization classification of tumors of the central nervous system: A summary. Acta Neuropathol 131: 803–820. doi: 10.1007/s00401-016-1545-1
    [5] Stupp R, Mason WP, Van dBMJ, et al. (2005) Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. New Engl J Med 352: 987–996.
    [6] Quail DF, Joyce JA (2017) The microenvironmental landscape of brain tumors. Cancer Cell 31: 326–341. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2017.02.009
    [7] Lohr J, Ratliff T, Huppertz A, et al. (2011) Effector T-cell infiltration positively impacts survival of glioblastoma patients and is impaired by tumor-derived TGF-beta. Clin Cancer Res 17: 4296–4308. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-2557
    [8] Kmiecik J, Poli A, Brons NH, et al. (2013) Elevated CD3+ and CD8+ tumor-infiltrating immune cells correlate with prolonged survival in glioblastoma patients despite integrated immunosuppressive mechanisms in the tumor microenvironment and at the systemic level. J Neuroimmunol 264: 71–83. doi: 10.1016/j.jneuroim.2013.08.013
    [9] Yang I, Han SJ, Sughrue ME, et al. (2011a) Immune cell infiltrate differences in pilocytic astrocytoma and glioblastoma: evidence of distinct immunological microenvironments that reflect tumor biology. J Neurosurg 115: 505–511.
    [10] Swain SL (1995) T-cell subsets: Who does the polarizing? Curr Biol 5: 849–851. doi: 10.1016/S0960-9822(95)00170-9
    [11] Mellanby RJ, Thomas DC, Lamb J (2009) Role of regulatory T-cells in autoimmunity. Clin Sci 116: 639–469. doi: 10.1042/CS20080200
    [12] Fecci PE, Mitchell DA, Whitesides JF, et al. (2006) Increased regulatory T-cell fraction amidst a diminished CD4 compartment explains cellular immune defects in patients with malignant glioma. Cancer Res 66: 3294–3302. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-3773
    [13] Fecci PE, Ochiai H, Mitchell DA, et al. (2007) Systemic CTLA-4 blockade ameliorates glioma-induced changes to the CD4+ T cell compartment without affecting regulatory T-cell function. Clin Cancer Res 13: 2158–2167. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-2070
    [14] Thomas AA, Fisher JL, Rahme GJ, et al. (2015) Regulatory T cells are not a strong predictor of survival for patients with glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol 17: 801–809. doi: 10.1093/neuonc/nou363
    [15] Han S, Zhang C, Li Q, et al. (2014) Tumour-infiltrating CD4(+) and CD8(+) lymphocytes as predictors of clinical outcome in glioma. Brit J Cancer 110: 2560–2568. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2014.162
    [16] Sayour EJ, McLendon P, McLendon R, et al. (2015) Increased proportion of FoxP3+ regulatory T cells in tumor infiltrating lymphocytes is associated with tumor recurrence and reduced survival in patients with glioblastoma. Cancer Immunol Immun 64: 419–427. doi: 10.1007/s00262-014-1651-7
    [17] Mu L, Yang C, Gao Q, et al. (2017) CD4+ and perivascular Foxp3+ T cells in glioma correlate with angiogenesis and tumor progression. Front Immunol 8: 1451. doi: 10.3389/fimmu.2017.01451
    [18] Braumuller H, Wieder T, Brenner E, et al. (2013) T-helper-1-cell cytokines drive cancer into senescence. Nature 494: 361–365. doi: 10.1038/nature11824
    [19] Hirschhorn-Cymerman D, Budhu S, Kitano S, et al. (2012) Induction of tumoricidal function in CD4+ T cells is associated with concomitant memory and terminally differentiated phenotype. J Exp Med 209: 2113–2126. doi: 10.1084/jem.20120532
    [20] Perez-Diez A, Joncker NT, Choi K, et al. (2007) CD4 cells can be more efficient at tumor rejection than CD8 cells. Blood 109: 5346–5354. doi: 10.1182/blood-2006-10-051318
    [21] Murphy KA, Erickson JR, Johnson CS, et al. (2014) CD8+ T cell-independent tumor regression induced by Fc-OX40L and therapeutic vaccination in a mouse model of glioma. J Immunol 192: 224–233. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1301633
    [22] Saha D, Martuza RL, Rabkin SD (2017) Macrophage polarization contributes to glioblastoma eradication by combination immunovirotherapy and immune checkpoint blockade. Cancer Cell 32: 253–267. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2017.07.006
    [23] Liu Z, Meng Q, Bartek J, et al. (2017b) Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) from patients with glioma. Oncoimmunology 6: e1252894.
    [24] Beck BH, Kim H, O'Brien R, et al. (2015) Dynamics of circulating gammadelta T cell activity in an immunocompetent mouse model of high-grade glioma. PLoS One 10: e0122387. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122387
    [25] Yang I, Tihan T, Han SJ, et al. (2010) CD8+ T-cell infiltrate in newly diagnosed glioblastoma is associated with long-term survival. J Clin Neurosci 17: 1381–1385. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2010.03.031
    [26] Nduom EK, Wei J, Yaghi NK, et al. (2016) PD-L1 expression and prognostic impact in glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol 18: 195–205. doi: 10.1093/neuonc/nov172
    [27] Heiland DH, Haaker G, Delev D, et al. (2017) Comprehensive analysis of PD-L1 expression in glioblastoma multiforme. Oncotarget 8: 42214–42225.
    [28] Reiss SN, Yerram P, Modelevsky L, et al. (2017) Retrospective review of safety and efficacy of programmed cell death-1 inhibitors in refractory high grade gliomas. J Immunother Cancer 5: 99. doi: 10.1186/s40425-017-0302-x
    [29] Miyauchi JT, Tsirka SE (2017) Advances in immunotherapeutic research for glioma therapy. J Neurol, 1–16.
    [30] Nakashima H, Alayo QA, Penaloza-MacMaster P, et al. (2018) Modeling tumor immunity of mouse glioblastoma by exhausted CD8+ T cells. Sci Rep 8: 208. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-18540-2
    [31] Haanen J (2017) Converting cold into hot tumors by combining immunotherapies. Cell 170: 1055–1056. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.08.031
    [32] Zeng J, See AP, Phallen J, et al. (2013) Anti-PD-1 blockade and stereotactic radiation produce long-term survival in mice with intracranial gliomas. Int J Radiat Oncol 86: 343–349. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.12.025
    [33] Waitz R, Solomon SB, Petre EN, et al. (2012) Potent induction of tumor immunity by combining tumor cryoablation with anti-CTLA-4 therapy. Cancer Res 72: 430–439. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-1782
    [34] Masson F, Calzascia T, Di BBW, et al. (2007) Brain microenvironment promotes the final functional maturation of tumor-specific effector CD8+ T cells. J Immunol 179: 845–853. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.179.2.845
    [35] Hong JJ, Rosenberg SA, Dudley ME, et al. (2010) Successful treatment of melanoma brain metastases with adoptive cell therapy. Clin Cancer Res 16: 4892–4898. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1507
    [36] Rosenberg SA, Yang JC, Sherry RM, et al. (2011) Durable complete responses in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic melanoma using T-cell transfer immunotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 17: 4550–1557. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0116
    [37] Brown CE, Badie B, Barish ME, et al. (2015) Bioactivity and safety of IL13Ralpha2-redirected chimeric antigen receptor CD8+ T cells in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Clin Cancer Res 21: 4062–4072. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-0428
    [38] Brown CE, Alizadeh D, Starr R, et al. (2016) Regression of glioblastoma after chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy. New Engl J Med 375: 2561–2569. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1610497
    [39] Liau LM, Prins RM, Kiertscher SM, et al. (2005) Dendritic cell vaccination in glioblastoma patients induces systemic and intracranial T-cell responses modulated by the local central nervous system tumor microenvironment. Clin Cancer Res 11: 5515–5525. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0464
    [40] Polyzoidis S, Ashkan K (2014) DCVax(R)-L--developed by Northwest Biotherapeutics. Hum Vacc Immunother 10: 3139–3145. doi: 10.4161/hv.29276
    [41] Flores C, Pham C, Snyder D, et al. (2015) Novel role of hematopoietic stem cells in immunologic rejection of malignant gliomas. Oncoimmunology 4: e994374. doi: 10.4161/2162402X.2014.994374
    [42] Muller I, Altherr D, Eyrich M, et al. (2016) Tumor antigen-specific T cells for immune monitoring of dendritic cell-treated glioblastoma patients. Cytotherapy 18: 1146–1161. doi: 10.1016/j.jcyt.2016.05.014
    [43] Garg AD, Vandenberk L, Koks C, et al. (2016) Dendritic cell vaccines based on immunogenic cell death elicit danger signals and T cell-driven rejection of high-grade glioma. Sci Transl Med 8: 328ra27.
    [44] Mitchell DA, Batich KA, Gunn MD, et al. (2015) Tetanus toxoid and CCL3 improve dendritic cell vaccines in mice and glioblastoma patients. Nature 519: 366–369. doi: 10.1038/nature14320
    [45] Ransohoff RM (2016) A polarizing question: do M1 and M2 microglia exist? Nat Neurosci 19: 987–991. doi: 10.1038/nn.4338
    [46] Charles NA, Holland EC, Gilbertson R, et al. (2011) The brain tumor microenvironment. Glia 59: 1169–1180. doi: 10.1002/glia.21136
    [47] Da FA, Badie B (2013) Microglia and macrophages in malignant gliomas: recent discoveries and implications for promising therapies. Clin Dev Immunol 2013: 264124.
    [48] Hewedi IH, Radwan NA, Shash LS, et al. (2013) Perspectives on the immunologic microenvironment of astrocytomas. Cancer Manag Res 5: 293–299.
    [49] Held-Feindt J, Hattermann K, Muerkoster SS, et al. (2010) CX3CR1 promotes recruitment of human glioma-infiltrating microglia/macrophages (GIMs). Exp Cell Res 316: 1553–1566. doi: 10.1016/j.yexcr.2010.02.018
    [50] Nishie A, Ono M, Shono T, et al. (1999) Macrophage infiltration and heme oxygenase-1 expression correlate with angiogenesis in human gliomas. Clin Cancer Res 5: 1107–1113.
    [51] Sorensen MD, Dahlrot RH, Boldt HB, et al. (2017) Tumour-associated microglia/macrophages predict poor prognosis in high-grade gliomas and correlate with an aggressive tumour subtype. Neuropath Appl Neuro 44: 185–206.
    [52] Okada M, Saio M, Kito Y, et al. (2009) Tumor-associated macrophage/microglia infiltration in human gliomas is correlated with MCP-3, but not MCP-1. Int J Oncol 34: 1621–1627.
    [53] Wang Q, Hu B, Hu X, et al. (2017) Tumor evolution of glioma-intrinsic gene expression subtypes associates with immunological changes in the microenvironment. Cancer Cell 32: 42–56. doi: 10.1016/j.ccell.2017.06.003
    [54] Bloch O, Crane CA, Kaur R, et al. (2013) Gliomas promote immunosuppression through induction of B7-H1 expression in tumor-associated macrophages. Clin Cancer Res 19: 3165–3175. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-3314
    [55] Gieryng A, Pszczolkowska D, Bocian K, et al. (2017) Immune microenvironment of experimental rat C6 gliomas resembles human glioblastomas. Sci Rep 7: 17556. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-17752-w
    [56] Xu S, Wei J, Wang F, et al. (2014) Effect of miR-142-3p on the M2 macrophage and therapeutic efficacy against murine glioblastoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 106.
    [57] McFarland BC, Marks MP, Rowse AL, et al. (2016) Loss of SOCS3 in myeloid cells prolongs survival in a syngeneic model of glioma. Oncotarget 7: 20621–20635.
    [58] Pyonteck SM, Akkari L, Schuhmacher AJ, et al. (2013) CSF-1R inhibition alters macrophage polarization and blocks glioma progression. Nat Med 19: 1264–1272. doi: 10.1038/nm.3337
    [59] Yan D, Kowal J, Akkari L, et al. (2017) Inhibition of colony stimulating factor-1 receptor abrogates microenvironment-mediated therapeutic resistance in gliomas. Oncogene 36: 6049–6058. doi: 10.1038/onc.2017.261
    [60] Colegio OR, Chu NQ, Szabo AL, et al. (2014) Functional polarization of tumour-associated macrophages by tumour-derived lactic acid. Nature 513: 559–563. doi: 10.1038/nature13490
    [61] Zhang I, Alizadeh D, Liang J, et al. (2016) Characterization of arginase expression in glioma-associated microglia and macrophages. PLoS One 11: e0165118. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0165118
    [62] Lyons YA, Pradeep S, Wu SY, et al. (2017) Macrophage depletion through colony stimulating factor 1 receptor pathway blockade overcomes adaptive resistance to anti-VEGF therapy. Oncotarget 8: 96496–96505.
    [63] Nakayama T, Kurobe H, Sugasawa N, et al. (2013) Role of macrophage-derived hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF)-1alpha as a mediator of vascular remodelling. Cardiovasc Res 99: 705–715. doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvt146
    [64] Jetten N, Verbruggen S, Gijbels MJ, et al. (2014) Anti-inflammatory M2, but not pro-inflammatory M1 macrophages promote angiogenesis in vivo. Angiogenesis 17: 109–118. doi: 10.1007/s10456-013-9381-6
    [65] Chang AL, Miska J, Wainwright DA, et al. (2016) CCL2 produced by the glioma microenvironment is essential for the recruitment of regulatory t cells and myeloid-derived suppressor cells. Cancer Res 76: 5671–5682. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-16-0144
    [66] Solga AC, Pong WW, Kim KY, et al. (2015) RNA sequencing of tumor-associated microglia reveals Ccl5 as a stromal chemokine critical for neurofibromatosis-1 glioma growth. Neoplasia 17: 776–788. doi: 10.1016/j.neo.2015.10.002
    [67] Nissen JC, Selwood DL, Tsirka SE (2013) Tuftsin signals through its receptor neuropilin-1 via the transforming growth factor beta pathway. J Neurochem 127: 394–402. doi: 10.1111/jnc.12404
    [68] Miyauchi JT, Chen D, Choi M, et al. (2016) Ablation of neuropilin 1 from glioma-associated microglia and macrophages slows tumor progression. Oncotarget 7: 9801–9814.
    [69] Koncina E, Roth L, Gonthier B, et al. (2007) Role of semaphorins during axon growth and guidance. Adv Exp Med Biol 621: 50–64. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-76715-4_4
    [70] Glinka Y, Prud'homme GJ (2008) Neuropilin-1 is a receptor for transforming growth factor beta-1, activates its latent form, and promotes regulatory T cell activity. J Leukoc Biol 84: 302–10. doi: 10.1189/jlb.0208090
    [71] Hu B, Guo P, Bar-Joseph I, et al. (2007) Neuropilin-1 promotes human glioma progression through potentiating the activity of the HGF/SF autocrine pathway. Oncogene 26: 5577–5586. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1210348
    [72] Gelfand MV, Hagan N, Tata A, et al. (2014) Neuropilin-1 functions as a VEGFR2 co-receptor to guide developmental angiogenesis independent of ligand binding. Elife 3: e03720.
    [73] Nakamura F, Goshima Y (2002) Structural and functional relation of neuropilins. Adv Exp Med Biol 515: 55–69. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4615-0119-0_5
    [74] Chaudhary B, Khaled YS, Ammori BJ, et al. (2014) Neuropilin 1: function and therapeutic potential in cancer. Cancer Immunol Immun 63: 81–99. doi: 10.1007/s00262-013-1500-0
    [75] Raimondi C, Fantin A, Lampropoulou A, et al. (2014) Imatinib inhibits VEGF-independent angiogenesis by targeting neuropilin 1-dependent ABL1 activation in endothelial cells. J Exp Med 211: 1167–1183. doi: 10.1084/jem.20132330
    [76] Campos-Mora M, Morales RA, Gajardo T, et al. (2013) Neuropilin-1 in transplantation tolerance. Front Immunol 4: 405.
    [77] Klagsbrun M, Takashima S, Mamluk R (2002) The role of neuropilin in vascular and tumor biology. Adv Exp Med Biol 515: 33–48. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4615-0119-0_3
    [78] Zachary I, Fantin A, Herzog B, et al. (2014) Neuropilin 1 (NRP1) hypomorphism combined with defective VEGF-A binding reveals novel roles for NRP1 in developmental and pathological angiogenesis. Development 141: 556–562. doi: 10.1242/dev.103028
    [79] Campos-Mora M, Morales RA, Perez F, et al. (2015) Neuropilin-1(+) regulatory T cells promote skin allograft survival and modulate effector CD4(+) T cells phenotypic signature. Immunol Cell Biol 93: 113–119. doi: 10.1038/icb.2014.77
    [80] Solomon BD, Mueller C, Chae WJ, et al. (2011) Neuropilin-1 attenuates autoreactivity in experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 108: 2040–2045. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1008721108
    [81] Delgoffe GM, Woo SR, Turnis ME, et al. (2013) Stability and function of regulatory T cells is maintained by a neuropilin-1-semaphorin-4a axis. Nature 501: 252–256. doi: 10.1038/nature12428
    [82] Hansen W, Hutzler M, Abel S, et al. (2012) Neuropilin 1 deficiency on CD4+Foxp3+ regulatory T cells impairs mouse melanoma growth. J Exp Med 209: 2001–2016. doi: 10.1084/jem.20111497
    [83] Milpied P, Massot B, Renand A, et al. (2011) IL-17-producing invariant NKT cells in lymphoid organs are recent thymic emigrants identified by neuropilin-1 expression. Blood 118: 2993–3002. doi: 10.1182/blood-2011-01-329268
    [84] Sarris M, Andersen KG, Randow F, et al. (2008) Neuropilin-1 expression on regulatory T cells enhances their interactions with dendritic cells during antigen recognition. Immunity 28: 402–413. doi: 10.1016/j.immuni.2008.01.012
    [85] Bourbie-Vaudaine S, Blanchard N, Hivroz C, et al. (2006) Dendritic cells can turn CD4+ T lymphocytes into vascular endothelial growth factor-carrying cells by intercellular neuropilin-1 transfer. J Immunol 177: 1460–1469. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.177.3.1460
    [86] Casazza A, Laoui D, Wenes M, et al. (2013) Impeding macrophage entry into hypoxic tumor areas by Sema3A/Nrp1 signaling blockade inhibits angiogenesis and restores antitumor immunity. Cancer Cell 24: 695–709. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2013.11.007
    [87] Dejda A, Mawambo G, Daudelin JF, et al. (2016) Neuropilin-1-expressing microglia are associated with nascent retinal vasculature yet dispensable for developmental angiogenesis. Invest Ophth Vis Sci 57: 1530–1536. doi: 10.1167/iovs.15-18598
    [88] Zhang W, Lv Y, Xue Y, et al. (2016b) Co-expression modules of NF1, PTEN and sprouty enable distinction of adult diffuse gliomas according to pathway activities of receptor tyrosine kinases. Oncotarget 7: 59098–59114.
    [89] Glinka Y, Stoilova S, Mohammed N, et al. (2011) Neuropilin-1 exerts co-receptor function for TGF-beta-1 on the membrane of cancer cells and enhances responses to both latent and active TGF-beta. Carcinogenesis 32: 613–621. doi: 10.1093/carcin/bgq281
    [90] Miyauchi JT, Caponegro MD, Chen D, et al. (2017) Deletion of neuropilin 1 from microglia or bone marrow-derived macrophages slows glioma progression. Cancer Res 78: 685–694.
    [91] Osada H, Tokunaga T, Nishi M, et al. (2004) Overexpression of the neuropilin 1 (NRP1) gene correlated with poor prognosis in human glioma. Anticancer Res 24: 547–552.
    [92] Chen L, Miao W, Tang X, et al. (2013) Inhibitory effect of neuropilin-1 monoclonal antibody (NRP-1 MAb) on glioma tumor in mice. J Biomed Nanotechnol 9: 551–558. doi: 10.1166/jbn.2013.1623
    [93] Formolo CA, Williams R, Gordish-Dressman H, et al. (2011) Secretome signature of invasive glioblastoma multiforme. J Proteome Res 10: 3149–3159. doi: 10.1021/pr200210w
    [94] Li X, Tang T, Lu X, et al. (2011) RNA interference targeting NRP-1 inhibits human glioma cell proliferation and enhances cell apoptosis. Mol Med Rep 4: 1261–1266.
    [95] Nasarre C, Roth M, Jacob L, et al. (2010) Peptide-based interference of the transmembrane domain of neuropilin-1 inhibits glioma growth in vivo. Oncogene 29: 2381–2392. doi: 10.1038/onc.2010.9
    [96] Bagci T, Wu JK, Pfannl R, et al. (2009) Autocrine semaphorin 3A signaling promotes glioblastoma dispersal. Oncogene 28: 3537–3550. doi: 10.1038/onc.2009.204
    [97] Treps L, Edmond S, Harford-Wright E, et al. (2016) Extracellular vesicle-transported Semaphorin3A promotes vascular permeability in glioblastoma. Oncogene 35: 2615–2623. doi: 10.1038/onc.2015.317
    [98] Jacob L, Sawma P, Garnier N, et al. (2016) Inhibition of PlexA1-mediated brain tumor growth and tumor-associated angiogenesis using a transmembrane domain targeting peptide. Oncotarget 7: 57851–57865.
    [99] Sulpice E, Plouet J, Berge M, et al. (2008) Neuropilin-1 and neuropilin-2 act as coreceptors, potentiating proangiogenic activity. Blood 111: 2036–2045. doi: 10.1182/blood-2007-04-084269
    [100] Hamerlik P, Lathia JD, Rasmussen R, et al. (2012) Autocrine VEGF-VEGFR2-Neuropilin-1 signaling promotes glioma stem-like cell viability and tumor growth. J Exp Med 209: 507–520. doi: 10.1084/jem.20111424
    [101] Gilbert MR, Dignam JJ, Armstrong TS, et al. (2014) A randomized trial of bevacizumab for newly diagnosed glioblastoma. New Engl J Med 370: 699–708. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1308573
    [102] Frei K, Gramatzki D, Tritschler I, et al. (2015) Transforming growth factor-beta pathway activity in glioblastoma. Oncotarget 6: 5963–5977.
    [103] Maxwell M, Galanopoulos T, Neville-Golden J, et al. (1992) Effect of the expression of transforming growth factor-beta 2 in primary human glioblastomas on immunosuppression and loss of immune surveillance. J Neurosurg 76: 799–804. doi: 10.3171/jns.1992.76.5.0799
    [104] Platten M, Wick W, Weller M (2001) Malignant glioma biology: role for TGF-beta in growth, motility, angiogenesis, and immune escape. Microsc Res Tech 52: 401–410. doi: 10.1002/1097-0029(20010215)52:4<401::AID-JEMT1025>3.0.CO;2-C
    [105] Chen ML, Pittet MJ, Gorelik L, et al. (2005) Regulatory T cells suppress tumor-specific CD8 T cell cytotoxicity through TGF-beta signals in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 419–424. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0408197102
    [106] Thomas DA, Massague J (2005) TGF-beta directly targets cytotoxic T cell functions during tumor evasion of immune surveillance. Cancer Cell 8: 369–380. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2005.10.012
    [107] Wesolowska A, Kwiatkowska A, Slomnicki L, et al. (2008) Microglia-derived TGF-beta as an important regulator of glioblastoma invasion--an inhibition of TGF-beta-dependent effects by shRNA against human TGF-beta type II receptor. Oncogene 27: 918–930. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1210683
    [108] Uhl M, Aulwurm S, Wischhusen J, et al. (2004) SD-208, a novel transforming growth factor beta receptor I kinase inhibitor, inhibits growth and invasiveness and enhances immunogenicity of murine and human glioma cells in vitro and in vivo. Cancer Res 64: 7954–7961. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-1013
    [109] Ueda R, Fujita M, Zhu X, et al. (2009) Systemic inhibition of transforming growth factor-beta in glioma-bearing mice improves the therapeutic efficacy of glioma-associated antigen peptide vaccines. Clin Cancer Res 15: 6551–6559. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-1067
    [110] Rodon J, Carducci MA, Sepulveda-Sanchez JM, et al. (2015) First-in-human dose study of the novel transforming growth factor-beta receptor I kinase inhibitor LY2157299 monohydrate in patients with advanced cancer and glioma. Clin Cancer Res 21: 553–560. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-1380
    [111] Falco SD (2012) The discovery of placenta growth factor and its biological activity. Exp Mol Med 44: 1–9. doi: 10.3858/emm.2012.44.1.025
    [112] Dewerchin M, Carmeliet P (2012) PlGF: a multitasking cytokine with disease-restricted activity. Csh Perspect Med 2: 143–152.
    [113] Lassen U, Chinot OL, McBain C, et al. (2015) Phase 1 dose-escalation study of the antiplacental growth factor monoclonal antibody RO5323441 combined with bevacizumab in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol 17: 1007–1015. doi: 10.1093/neuonc/nov019
    [114] Snuderl M, Batista A, Kirkpatrick ND, et al. (2013) Targeting placental growth factor/neuropilin 1 pathway inhibits growth and spread of medulloblastoma. Cell 152: 1065–1076. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.01.036
    [115] Guo Y, Wang X, Tian X, et al. (2012) Tumor-derived hepatocyte growth factor is associated with poor prognosis of patients with glioma and influences the chemosensitivity of glioma cell line to cisplatin in vitro. World J Surg Oncol 10: 1–11. doi: 10.1186/1477-7819-10-1
    [116] Wen PY, Schiff D, Cloughesy TF, et al. (2011) A phase II study evaluating the efficacy and safety of AMG 102 (rilotumumab) in patients with recurrent glioblastoma. Neuro Oncol 13: 437–446. doi: 10.1093/neuonc/noq198
    [117] De Groot JF, Prados M, Urquhart T, et al. (2009) A phase II study of XL184 in patients (pts) with progressive glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) in first or second relapse. J Clin Oncol 27: 2047.
    [118] Schiff D, Desjardins A, Cloughesy T, et al. (2016) Phase 1 dose escalation trial of the safety and pharmacokinetics of cabozantinib concurrent with temozolomide and radiotherapy or temozolomide after radiotherapy in newly diagnosed patients with high-grade gliomas. Cancer 122: 582–587. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29798
    [119] Wu HB, Wang Z, Wang QS, et al. (2015) Use of labelled tLyP-1 as a novel ligand targeting the NRP receptor to image glioma. PLoS One 10: e0137676. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0137676
    [120] Ying M, Shen Q, Zhan C, et al. (2016) A stabilized peptide ligand for multifunctional glioma targeted drug delivery. J Control Release 243: 86–98. doi: 10.1016/j.jconrel.2016.09.035
    [121] Ying M, Zhan C, Wang S, et al. (2016) Liposome-based systemic glioma-targeted drug delivery enabled by all-d peptides. ACS Appl Mater Inter 8: 29977–29985. doi: 10.1021/acsami.6b10146
    [122] Liu C, Yao S, Li X, et al. (2017) iRGD-mediated core-shell nanoparticles loading carmustine and O6-benzylguanine for glioma therapy. J Drug Target 25: 235–246. doi: 10.1080/1061186X.2016.1238091
    [123] Liu Y, Mei L, Xu C, et al. (2016) Dual receptor recognizing cell penetrating peptide for selective targeting, efficient intratumoral diffusion and synthesized anti-glioma therapy. Theranostics 6: 177–191. doi: 10.7150/thno.13532
    [124] Bechet D, Auger F, Couleaud P, et al. (2015) Multifunctional ultrasmall nanoplatforms for vascular-targeted interstitial photodynamic therapy of brain tumors guided by real-time MRI. Nanomed-Nanotechnol 11: 657–670. doi: 10.1016/j.nano.2014.12.007
    [125] Patnaik A, Lorusso PM, Messersmith WA, et al. (2014) A Phase Ib study evaluating MNRP1685A, a fully human anti-NRP1 monoclonal antibody, in combination with bevacizumab and paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors. Cancer Chemoth Pharm 73: 951–960. doi: 10.1007/s00280-014-2426-8

  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Lijie Liu, Xiaojing Wei, Leilei Wei, A fully discrete local discontinuous Galerkin method based on generalized numerical fluxes to variable-order time-fractional reaction-diffusion problem with the Caputo fractional derivative, 2023, 31, 2688-1594, 5701, 10.3934/era.2023289
    2. Junbiao Guan, Feng Wang, Investigating the dynamics, synchronization of a novel chaotic system reduced from a modified KdV–Burgers–Kuramoto equation, 2024, 0973-1458, 10.1007/s12648-024-03434-7
    3. Bazar Babajanov, Fakhriddin Abdikarimov, New exact soliton and periodic wave solutions of the nonlinear fractional evolution equations with additional term, 2023, 8, 26668181, 100567, 10.1016/j.padiff.2023.100567
    4. Hui Bi, Feilong Zhao, Bound-preserving schemes for
    P2
    local discontinuous Galerkin discretizations of KdV-type equations, 2025, 44, 2238-3603, 10.1007/s40314-024-03002-z
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2018 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索
AIMS Allergy and Immunology
0.9

Metrics

Article views(6144) PDF downloads(978) Cited by(2)

Preview PDF
Download XML
Export Citation
Article outline
Abstract
   Introduction
   Methods
   Results
   Discussion
   Limitations
   Conclusions
References

Figures and Tables

Figures(3)

Other Articles By Authors

Related pages

Tools

Copyright © AIMS Press

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog