Fig. 1: AC-NPs efficiently capture tumor antigens and enhance antigen delivery to CD103+ cDC1s.

a Scanning electron microscopic (SEM) images of AC-NPs. Scale bar: 500 nm. Representative image from two independent experiments. b–d Physicochemical properties of AC-NPs, including particle diameter (n = 5 for AC-NP, n = 3 for NPNeg, n = 4 for NPPEG, independent samples) (b), size distribution (c), and surface charge (n = 3, independent samples) (d). e Tumor protein binding capability of AC-NPs (n = 3, independent samples). f–h Analysis of the proteins captured by AC-NPs from MC38 tumor lysates. f Number of captured unique proteins (n = 3, independent samples). g Relative quantity of captured frequently mutated proteins (n = 3, independent samples). h Relative quantity of captured DAMPs (n = 3, independent samples). i–k AC-NPs enhanced antigen delivery to CD103+ cDC1s. i Representative flow cytometry plots showing the uptake of FITC-labeled tumor lysate (TL-FITC) into cDC1s assisted by AC-NPs after 30 min or 4 h incubation. j Mean fluorescence intensity (MFI) of FITC-tumor lysate in cDC1s (n = 5, biologically independent samples). k CLSM image showing AC-NP assisted tumor antigen delivery into cDC1s after 4 h incubation. Scale bar: 10 μm. Representative image from three independent experiments. l, m AC-NPs enhanced antigen presentation on cDC1s. l Representative flow cytometry plot showing the expression of H-2Kb-SIINFEKL on cDC1s using OVA as a model tumor antigen. m Relative quantity of H-2Kb-SIINFEKL expressed on cDC1s (n = 3, biologically independent samples). n–r AC-NPs efficiently activated cDC1s (n = 5, biologically independent samples). n Representative flow cytometry plots showing the expression of activation markers (CD80 and CD86) on cDC1s treated with tumor lysate and NPs for 24 hrs. o Percentage of CD80 + CD86+ double-positive cDC1s. p–r Relative expression of DC activation markers including CD86 (p), CD80 (q), and MHCII (r). For b, d–f, j, m, o–r, data were presented as mean values ± SEM. Statistical analysis for (e): two-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett test. P < 0.0001 as compared to NPPEG and NPNeg. Statistical analysis for (f–h, j, m, o–r): one-way ANOVA followed by Dunnett test. For g, h, black colored p values compare AC-NPs to NPNeg, and red colored p values compare AC-NPs to NPPEG. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.