Monoclonal Antibody Targeting of Adhesion Molecules

  • Markus H. Frank
  • David M. Briscoe


The process of adhesion has been described in the medical literature for more than 100 years as a characteristic component of all forms of inflammation. Over the past few decades, multiple investigators have defined series of families of adhesion molecules that provide for intimate cell-cell contact and facilitate interactions among another series of activation molecules. To this end, the process of adhesion is intimately associated with activation and there has been some debate as to whether certain molecules provide for selective adhesion or for selective activation [1–7]. For instance, the adhesive interactions between MHC molecules and the T cell receptor, discussed in detail in Chapter X are critical for the activation of lymphocytes. But these interactions are of very low affinity and thus require the function of families of high affinity adhesion molecules to enable close approximation of these molecules and activation events. Furthermore, biological processes have evolved to facilitate these processes in as much as the interaction between cognate antigen and the T cell receptor is a process that facilitates the expression of high affinity adhesion molecules; and disruption of adhesion (such as ICAM-1-mediated adhesion, discussed below) may dysregulate activation. To this end it must be emphasized that adhesion events interrelate with activation responses and it is important to consider the entire adhesion process as fundamental to any bidirectional cell-cell activation response.


Acute Rejection Allograft Rejection Delay Graft Function Cardiac Allograft Allograft Survival 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Briscoe, D.M., Recent Insights into the Roles of the Endothelium in Allorecognition. Graft, 1999. 2(6): p. 261–262.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pober, J.S., Immunobiology of human vascular endothelium. Immunol Res, 1999. 19(2–3): p. 225–232.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rabb, H. and J.V. Bonventre, Leukocyte adhesion molecules in transplantation. Am J Med, 1999. 107(2): p. 157–165.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Briscoe, D.M., S.I. Alexander, and A.H. Lichtman, Interactions between T lymphocytes and endothelial cells in allograft rejection. Curr Opin Immunol, 1998. 10(5): p. 525–531.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fuggle, S.V. and D.D. Koo, Cell adhesion molecules in clinical renal transplantation. Transplantation, 1998. 65(6): p. 763–769.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Briscoe, D.M., et al., The problem of chronic rejection: influence of leukocyte-endothelial interactions. Kidney Int Suppl, 1997. 58: p. S22–S27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Carlos, T.M. and J.M. Harlan, Leukocyte-endothelial adhesion molecules. Blood, 1994. 84(7): p. 2068–2101.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pober, J.S. and R.S. Cotran, The role of endothelial cells in inflammation. Transplantation, 1990. 50(4): p. 537–544.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pober, J.S., et al., Can graft endothelial cells initiate a host anti-graft immune response? Transplantation, 1996. 61(3): p. 343–349.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. lO.
    Imhof, B.A. and D. Dunon, Leukocyte migration and adhesion. Adv Immunol, 1995. 58: p. 345–416.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Springer, T.A., Traffic signals for lymphocyte recirculation and leukocyte emigration: the multistep paradigm. Cell, 1994. 76(2): p. 301–314.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yamada, S., et al., Rolling in P-selectin-deficient mice is reduced but not eliminated in the dorsal skin. Blood, 1995. 86(9): p. 3487–3492.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ley, K. and T.F. Tedder, Leukocyte interactions with vascular endothelium. New insights into selectin-mediated attachment and rolling. J Immunol, 1995. 155(2): p. 525–528.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Arbones, M.L., et al., Lymphocyte homing and leukocyte rolling and migration are impaired in L-selectin-deficient mice. Immunity, 1994. 1(4): p. 247–260.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mayadas, T.N., et al., Leukocyte rolling and extravasation are severely compromised in P selectin-deficient mice. Cell, 1993. 74(3): p. 541–554.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Labow, M.A., et al., Characterization of E-selectin-deficient mice: demonstration of overlapping function of the endothelial selectins. Immunity, 1994. 1(8): p. 709–720.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Luscinskas, F.W., H. Ding, and A.H. Lichtman, P-selectin and vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 mediate rolling and arrest, respectively, of CD4+ T lymphocytes on tumor necrosis factor alpha-activated vascular endothelium underflow. J Exp Med, 1995. 181(3): p. 1179–1186.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pober, J.S., et al., Overlapping patterns of activation of human endothelial cells by interleukin 1, tumor necrosis factor, and immune interferon. J Immunol, 1986. 137(6): p. 1893–1896.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Thomhill, M.H., et al., Tumor necrosis factor combines with IL-4 or IFN-gamma to selectively enhance endothelial cell adhesiveness for T cells. The contribution of vascular cell adhesion molecule-1-dependent and-independent binding mechanisms. J Immunol, 1991. 146(2): p. 592–598.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thornhill, M.H. and D.O. Haskard, IL-4 regulates endothelial cell activation by IL-1, tumor necrosis factor, or IFN-gamma. J Immunol, 1990. 145(3): p. 865–872.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Briscoe, D.M., R.S. Cotran, and J.S. Pober, Effects of tumor necrosis factor, lipopolysaccharide, and IL-4 on the expression of vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 in vivo. Correlation with CD3+ T cell infiltration. J Immunol, 1992. 149(9): p. 2954–2960.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ley, K., et al., Sequential contribution of L-and P-selectin to leukocyte rolling in vivo. J Exp Med, 1995. 181(2): p. 669–675.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Springer, T.A., Adhesion receptors of the immune system. Nature, 1990. 346(6283): p. 425–434.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hemler, M.E., VLA proteins in the integrin family: structures, functions, and their role on leukocytes. Annu Rev Immunol, 1990. 8: p. 365–400.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hynes, R.O., Integrins: versatility, modulation, and signaling in cell adhesion. Cell, 1992. 69(1): p. 11–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Marlin, S.D. and T.A. Springer, Purified intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (ICAM-1) is a ligand for lymphocyte function-associated antigen 1 (LFA-1). Cell, 1987. 51(5): p. 813–819.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Diamond, M.S., et al., ICAM-1 (CD54): a counter-receptor for Mac-1 (CDllb/CD18). J Cell Biol, 1990. 111(6 Pt 2): p. 3129–3139.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    de Fougerolles, A.R., et al., Characterization of ICAM-2 and evidence for a third counter-receptor for LFA-1. J Exp Med, 1991. 174(1): p. 253–267.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Muller, W.A., The role of PECAM-1 (CD31) in leukocyte emigration: studies in vitro and in vivo. J Leukoc Biol, 1995. 57(4): p. 523–528.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Allport, J.R., W.A. Muller, and F.W. Luscinskas, Monocytes induce reversible focal changes in vascular endothelial Cadherin complex during transendothelial migration underflow. J Cell Biol, 2000. 148(1): p. 203–216.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Del Maschio, A., et al., Polymorphonuclear leukocyte adhesion triggers the disorganization of endothelial cell-to-cell adherens junctions. J Cell Biol, 1996. 135(2): p. 497–510.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bianchi, E., et al., Through and beyond the wall: late steps in leukocyte transendothelial migration. Immunol Today, 1997. 18(12): p. 586–591.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bradley, L.M. and S.R. Watson, Lymphocyte migration into tissue: the paradigm derived from CD4 subsets. Curr Opin Immunol, 1996. 8(3): p. 312–320.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lichtman, A.H., et al., CD45RA-RO+ (memory) but not CD45RA+RO-(naive) T cells roll efficiently on E-and P-selectin and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 underflow. J Immunol, 1997. 158(8): p. 3640–3650.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lichtman, A.H. and A.K. Abbas, T cell subsets: recruiting the right kind of help. Curr Biol, 1997. 7(4): p. R242–R244.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Borges, E., et al., P-selectin glycoprotein ligand-1 (PSGL-1) on T helper 1 but not on T helper 2 cells binds to P-selectin and supports migration into inflamed skin. J Exp Med, 1997. 185(3): p. 573–578.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Austrup, F., et al., P-and E-selectin mediate recruitment of T-helper-1 but not T-helper-2 cells into inflammed tissues. Nature, 1997. 385(6611): p. 81–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Brockmeyer, C., et al., Distribution of cell adhesion molecules (ICAM-1, VCAM-1, ELAM-1) in renal tissue during allograft rejection. Transplantation, 1993. 55(3): p. 610–615.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Taylor, P.M., et al., Induction of vascular adhesion molecules during rejection of human cardiac allografts. Transplantation, 1992. 54(3): p. 451–457.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Briscoe, D.M., et al., Predictive value of inducible endothelial cell adhesion molecule expression for acute rejection of human cardiac allografts [published erratum appears in Transplantation 1995 Mar 27;59(6):928]. Transplantation, 1995. 59(2): p. 204–211.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Alpers, C.E., et al., Expression of vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 in kidney allograft rejection. Kidney Int, 1993. 44(4): p. 805–816.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cosimi, A.B., et al., In vivo effects of monoclonal antibody to ICAM-1 (CD54) in nonhuman primates with renal allografts. J Immunol, 1990. 144(12): p. 4604–4612.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kanagawa, K., et al., Identification of ICAM-l-positive cells in the nongrafted and transplanted rat kidney—an immunohistochemical and ultrastructural study. Transplantation, 1991. 52(6): p. 1057–1062.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Wuthrich, R.P., Intercellular adhesion molecules and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 and the kidney [editorial]. J Am Soc Nephrol, 1992. 3(6): p. 1201–1211.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Pelletier, R.P., et al., Importance of endothelial VCAM-1 for inflammatory leukocytic infiltration in vivo. J Immunol, 1992. 149(7): p. 2473–2481.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Briscoe, D.M., et al., Expression of vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 in human renal allografts. J Am Soc Nephrol, 1992. 3(5): p. 1180–1185.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Briscoe, D.M. and R.S. Cotran, Role of leukocyte-endothelial cell adhesion molecules in renal inflammation: in vitro and in vivo studies [published erratum appears in Kidney Int 1993 Sep;44(3):658]. Kidney Int Suppl, 1993. 42: p. S27–S34.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Kelly, K.J., et al., Antibody to intercellular adhesion molecule 1 protects the kidney against ischemic injury. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1994. 91(2): p. 812–816.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rabb, H., et al., Antibodies to ICAM-1 protect kidneys in severe ischemic reperfusion injury. Biochem Biophys Res Commun, 1995. 211(1): p. 67–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Linas, Sn., et al., Ischemia increases neutrophil retention and worsens acute renal failure: role of oxygen metabolites and ICAM 1. Kidney Int, 1995. 48(5): p. 1584–1591.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Haller, H., et al., Antisense oligonucleotides for ICAM-1 attenuate reperfusion injury and renal failure in the rat. Kidney Int, 1996. 50(2): p. 473–480.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Rabb, H., et al., Role of CDlla and CDllb in ischemic acute renal failure in rats. Am J Physiol, 1994. 267(6 Pt 2): p. F1052–F1058.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Kelly, K.J., et al., Intercellular adhesion molecule-1-deficient mice are protected against ischemic renal injury. J Clin Invest, 1996. 97(4): p. 1056–1063.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pober, J.S., et al., Ia expression by vascular endothelium is inducible by activated T cells and by human gamma interferon. J Exp Med, 1983. 157(4): p. 1339–1353.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Pardi, R., J.R. Bender, and E.G. Engleman, Lymphocyte subsets differentially induce class II human leukocyte antigens on allogeneic microvascular endothelial cells. J Immunol, 1987. 139(8): p. 2585–2592.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Collins, T., et al., Immune interferon activates multiple class II major histocompatibility complex genes and the associated invariant chain gene in human endothelial cells and dermal fibroblasts. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1984. 81(15): p. 4917–4921.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Hughes, C.C., C.O. Savage, and J.S. Pober, Endothelial cells augment T cell interleukin 2 production by a contact-dependent mechanism involving CD2/LFA-3 interaction. J Exp Med, 1990. 171(5): p. 1453–1467.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Hughes, C.C., C.O. Savage, and J.S. Pober, The endothelial cell as a regulator of Tcell function. Immunol Rev, 1990. 117: p. 85–102.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hughes, C.C. and J.S. Pober, Costimulation of peripheral blood T cell activation by human endothelial cells. Enhanced IL-2 transcription correlates with increased c-fos synthesis and increased Fos content of AP-1. J Immunol, 1993. 150(8 Pt 1): p. 3148–3160.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    van Seventer, G.A., et al., Analysis of T cell stimulation by superantigen plus major histocompatibility complex class II molecules or by CD3 monoclonal antibody: costimulation by purified adhesion ligands VCAM-1, ICAM-1, but not ELAM-1. J Exp Med, 1991. 174(4): p. 901–913.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Van Seventer, G.A., et al., The LFA-1 ligand ICAM-1 provides an important costimulatory signal for T cell receptor-mediated activation of resting T cells. J Immunol, 1990. 144(12): p. 4579–4586.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Damle, N.K., et al., Differential costimulatory effects of adhesion molecules B7, ICAM-1, LFA-3, and VCAM-1 on resting and antigen-primed CD4+ T lymphocytes. J Immunol, 1992. 148(7): p. 1985–1992.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Damle, N.K., et al., Costimulation via vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 induces in T cells increased responsiveness to the CD28 counter-receptor B7. Cell Immunol, 1993. 148(1): p. 144–156.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Damle, N.K., et al., Costimulation with integrin ligands intercellular adhesion molecule-1 or vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 augments activation-induced death of antigen-specific CD4+ T lymphocytes. J Immunol, 1993. 151(5): p. 2368–2379.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Denton, M.D., et al., Endothelial cells modify the costimulatory capacity of transmigrating leukocytes and promote CD28-mediated CD4(+) T cell alloactivation. J Exp Med, 1999. 190(4): p. 555–566.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Ferrero, E., et al., CD14+ CD34+ peripheral blood mononuclear cells migrate across endothelium and give rise to immunostimulatory dendritic cells. J Immunol, 1998. 160(6): p. 2675–2683.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Randolph, G.J., et al., Differentiation of monocytes into dendritic cells in a model of transendothelial trafficking [see comments]. Science, 1998. 282(5388): p. 480–483.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Kobayashi, H., et al., Prolongation of rat cardiac allograft survival by a monoclonal antibody: anti-rat intercellular adhesion molecule-1. Cardiovasc Surg, 1993. 1(5): p. 577–582.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Yamataka, T., et al., The effect of anti-ICAM-1 monoclonal antibody treatment on the transplantation of the small bowel in rats. J Pediatr Surg, 1993. 28(11): p. 1451–1457.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Kanagawa, K., et al., Strain combination-dependent genesis of necrotizing arteritis in anti-ICAM-1 antibody-perfused renal allografts in the rat. Pathol Int, 1995. 45(3): p. 196–201.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Sadahiro, M., T.O. McDonald, and M.D. Allen, Reduction in cellular and vascular rejection by blocking leukocyte adhesion molecule receptors. Am J Pathol, 1993. 142(3): p. 675–683.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Kameoka, H., et al., The immunosuppressive action of anti-CD18 monoclonal antibody in rat heterotopic heart allotransplantation. Transplantation, 1993. 55(3): p. 665–667.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Nakakura, E.K., et al., Potent and effective prolongation by anti-LFA-1 monoclonal antibody monotherapy of non-primarily vascularized heart allograft survival in mice without T cell depletion. Transplantation, 1993. 55(2): p. 412–417.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Nakakura, E.K., et al., Long-term survival of solid organ allografts by brief anti-lymphocyte function-associated antigen-1 monoclonal antibody monotherapy. Transplantation, 1996. 62(5): p. 547–552.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Nishihara, M., et al., Awareness of donor alloantigens in antiadhesion therapy induces antigen-specific unresponsiveness to islet allografts. Transplantation, 1997. 64(7): p. 965–970.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Isobe, M., et al., Specific acceptance of cardiac allograft after treatment with antibodies to ICAM-1 and LFA-1. Science, 1992. 255(5048): p. 1125–1127.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Isobe, M., et al., Assessment of tolerance induction to cardiac allograft by anti-ICAM-1 and anti-LFA-1 monoclonal antibodies. J Heart Lung Transplant, 1997. 16(11): p. 1149–1156.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Isobe, M., et al., Acceptance of primary skin graft after treatment with anti-intercellular adhesion molecule-1 and anti-leukocyte function-associated antigen-1 monoclonal antibodies in mice. Transplantation, 1996. 62(3): p. 411–413.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Brandt, M., et al., Treatment with monoclonal antibodies to ICAM-1 and LFA-1 in rat heart allograft rejection. Transpl Int, 1997. 10(2): p. 141–144.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Orosz, CG., et al., Treatment with anti-vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 monoclonal antibody induces long-term murine cardiac allograft acceptance. Transplantation, 1993. 56(2): p. 453–460.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Isobe, M., et al., Immunosuppression to cardiac allografts and soluble antigens by anti-vascular cellular adhesion molecule-1 and anti-very late antigen-4 monoclonal antibodies. J Immunol, 1994. 153(12): p. 5810–5818.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Paul, L.C., et al., The efficacy of LFA-1 and VLA-4 antibody treatment in rat vascularized cardiac allograft rejection. Transplantation, 1993. 55(5): p. 1196–1199.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Paul, L.C., et al., Anti-integrin (LFA-1, VLA-4, and Mac-1) antibody treatment and acute cardiac graft rejection in the rat. Transpl Int, 1996. 9(4): p. 420–425.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Anderson, D.C., et al., The severe and moderate phenotypes of heritable Mac-1, LFA-1 deficiency: their quantitative definition and relation to leukocyte dysfunction and clinical features. J Infect Dis, 1985. 152(4): p. 668–689.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Anderson, D.C. and T.A. Springer, Leukocyte adhesion deficiency: an inherited defect in the Mac-1, LFA-1, and pl50,95 glycoproteins. Annu Rev Med, 1987. 38: p. 175–194.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Etzioni, A., Adhesion molecule deficiencies and their clinical significance. Cell Adhes Commun, 1994. 2(3): p. 257–260.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Price, T.H., et al., In vivo neutrophil and lymphocyte function studies in a patient with leukocyte adhesion deficiency type II. Blood, 1994. 84(5): p. 1635–1639.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Haug, C.E., et al., A phase I trial of immunosuppression with anti-ICAM-1 (CD54) mAb in renal allograft recipients. Transplantation, 1993. 55(4): p. 766–772; discussion 772–773.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Saimela, K., et al., A randomized multicenter trial of the anti-ICAM-1 monoclonal antibody (enlimomab) for the prevention of acute rejection and delayed onset of graft function in cadaveric renal transplantation: a report of the European Anti-ICAM-1 Renal Transplant Study Group. Transplantation, 1999. 67(5): p. 729–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Le Mauff, B., et al., A dose-searching trial of an anti-LFA1 monoclonal antibody in first kidney transplant recipients. Kidney Int Suppl, 1996. 53: p. S44–S50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Le Mauff, B., et al., Effect of anti-LFA1 (CDlla) monoclonal antibodies in acute rejection in human kidney transplantation. Transplantation, 1991. 52(2): p. 291–296.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Hourmant, M., et al., A randomized multicenter trial comparing leukocyte function-associated antigen-1 monoclonal antibody with rabbit antithymocyte globulin as induction treatment in first kidney transplantations. Transplantation, 1996. 62(11): p. 1565–1570.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Markus H. Frank
  • David M. Briscoe

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations