Abstract
It has been reported that lymphocytes from cancer patients give positive responses to PPD, myelin basic protein, tumour basic protein, and certain histone fractions in the MEM test. The underlying mechanisms of the MEM test are poorly understood, but it is widely assumed that it detects immunological sensitization to specific antigenic determinants. The cross-reactivity experienced is interpreted as indicating shared antigenicity. Since all the stimulatory proteins are strongly basic we investigated an alternative explanation that responsiveness is a function of electrical charge by comparing the known stimulatory proteins in the MEM test with two others of similar basicity: lysozyme and cytochrome-C. We obtained highly significant stimulation with PPD, tryptophane peptide of myelin, and tumour basic protein using Mantoux + cancer patients, but found no response to other basic proteins. We failed to confirm the reported activity of histone F2a. Our results indicate that basicity alone is insufficient to elicit response, and strengthens the concept that the MEM test is measuring sensitization to the determinants shared by myelin and tumour basic protein.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 24 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $10.79 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shaw, A., Ettin, G. & McPherson, T. Responses of cancer patients in the MEM test: Not just a function of charge on basic proteins. Br J Cancer 34, 7–13 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1976.114
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.1976.114
This article is cited by
-
Electrophoretic mobility (EM)-test for childhood cancer diagnosis
European Journal of Pediatrics (1977)