This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Reply to article  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (4)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

ALBERT C. SNELL, Jr., M.D.

AMA Arch Ophthalmol. 1952;48(3):298-306.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

THIS INVESTIGATION was undertaken to study the differences between the ocular and the subcutaneous inflammatory responses following heterologous tumor transplantation, and to determine whether such differences could account for the superiority of the ocular route as a transplantation site.

That such differences do occur appears to have been taken as self-evident in many of the published reports dealing with the ocular transplantation of tumors. For example, Smirnova¹ assumed that the "agents of defense" could not act in the: anterior chamber but presented no evidence to support this hypothesis. Greene² stated that the eye differs from other transplantation sites in the rapidity and intensity of foreign-body reactions. Greene, furthermore, concluded that these differences account for the success of transplants in the ocular area. On the other hand, Morris and associates³ described destruction of tumor heterotransplants in the eye by lymphocytes, plasma cells, and, occasionally, foreign body giant cells. . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
ROCHESTER, N. Y.

From the Divisions of Ophthalmology and Cancer Research, Department of Surgery, the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?