ROUS-WH I PPLE AWARD
-el
rw,-ro.bwf 7.
lib,.
. . . . .I. .
A
NvX
A1
:
,v
::
RICHMOND T. PREHN, MD
The American Journal of PATHOLOGY JULY 1977 * VOLUME 88, NUMBER 1
Presentation of the Rous-Whipple Award to Richmond T. Prehn, MD March 14, 1977 WHEN RICHNMOND T. PREHN graduated from the Long Island College of Medicine in 1947, most respectable tumor biologists did not consider immunology to be particularly relevant to their discipline. By 1957, the situation had changed drastically, largely due to Prehn's use of a very well-controlled inbred mouse system to demonstrate specific cancer antigens (Prehn and Main: J Natl Cancer Inst 18:769-778, 1957). This seminal work, and subsequent elaboration by Prehn and co-workers and by other groups, catalyzed an explosion of research in tumor immunology, resulting in the development of a virtual dogma of immunosurveillance as the critical homeostatic mechanism for the elimination of incipient neoplasms. Those of us who have had the wonderful experience of catching the twinkle in Rich Prehn's eyes as he attacks fashionable views (especially his own) were not surprised that it was he who most clearly pointed out the many inadequacies of the immunosurveillance theoryv in the case of spontaneous neoplasms. He, in fact, predicted a stimulatory role of the immune system on tumor growth under appropriate experimental conditions. In the 1970s, this prediction received strong experimental support, first by Prehn and then by several other groups. This revolutionary concept has forced a major reevaluation of the approach to clinical cancer immunotherapy, an applied discipline to which he and his students have actively contributed. Rich is not only a founding father of tumor immunology; he is also a founding father of transplantation biology, having provided, with his colleagues Algire and Weaver, in the mid 1950s, the first clear evidence of Address reprint requests to Dr. George MI. Martin. Department of Patholog-, Unisersity of W'ashington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington 98195. 3
4
ROUS-WHIPPLE AWARD
American Journal of Pathology
the major role of cell-mediated immunity in allograft rejection. The ingenious "in vivo tissue culture" apparatus used by these workers for those studies has since been applied to a host of other problems by numerous scientists. Rich is a magnificant teacher, with a knack for getting down to crucial issues and explaining them in simple language. A rather unique teaching skill has been his ability to stimulate biochemists to think in purely biologic terms; for example, Charlie Heidelberger was moved to the point of doing tissue culture cloning experiments as a result of having read Rich Prehn's clonal selection theory of chemical carcinogenesis (J Natl Cancer Inst 32:1-17, 1964). In my opinion, the final word is not yet in on the applicability of that theory to one or another of the steps in chemical oncogenesis; it may yet prove to be of great significance. Rich's life has been tied up with sailboats, with inbred mice, and with his lovely Finnish wife, Liisa. In sailing their Chinese Junk into Bar Harbor, he has finally brought together all three passions. In his new role as the director of The Jackson Laboratory, we look forward to a major renaissance of that great institution. According to Rich, the challenge of the future in multicellular biology is to learn more about how cells interact with one another. Once again, Prehn is on the right track. But in 10 years, will he be warning us about excessive enthusiasm in that direction? It is indeed a special pleasure and high honor for me to present to Richmond Prehn, on behalf of the American Association of Pathologists, the second Rous-Whipple Award. He now joins Jacob Furth in that very select club of distinguished experimental pathologists. George M. Martin, MD
-el
rw,-ro.bwf 7.
lib,.
. . . . .I. .
A
NvX
A1
:
,v
::
RICHMOND T. PREHN, MD
The American Journal of PATHOLOGY JULY 1977 * VOLUME 88, NUMBER 1
Presentation of the Rous-Whipple Award to Richmond T. Prehn, MD March 14, 1977 WHEN RICHNMOND T. PREHN graduated from the Long Island College of Medicine in 1947, most respectable tumor biologists did not consider immunology to be particularly relevant to their discipline. By 1957, the situation had changed drastically, largely due to Prehn's use of a very well-controlled inbred mouse system to demonstrate specific cancer antigens (Prehn and Main: J Natl Cancer Inst 18:769-778, 1957). This seminal work, and subsequent elaboration by Prehn and co-workers and by other groups, catalyzed an explosion of research in tumor immunology, resulting in the development of a virtual dogma of immunosurveillance as the critical homeostatic mechanism for the elimination of incipient neoplasms. Those of us who have had the wonderful experience of catching the twinkle in Rich Prehn's eyes as he attacks fashionable views (especially his own) were not surprised that it was he who most clearly pointed out the many inadequacies of the immunosurveillance theoryv in the case of spontaneous neoplasms. He, in fact, predicted a stimulatory role of the immune system on tumor growth under appropriate experimental conditions. In the 1970s, this prediction received strong experimental support, first by Prehn and then by several other groups. This revolutionary concept has forced a major reevaluation of the approach to clinical cancer immunotherapy, an applied discipline to which he and his students have actively contributed. Rich is not only a founding father of tumor immunology; he is also a founding father of transplantation biology, having provided, with his colleagues Algire and Weaver, in the mid 1950s, the first clear evidence of Address reprint requests to Dr. George MI. Martin. Department of Patholog-, Unisersity of W'ashington School of Medicine, Seattle, Washington 98195. 3
4
ROUS-WHIPPLE AWARD
American Journal of Pathology
the major role of cell-mediated immunity in allograft rejection. The ingenious "in vivo tissue culture" apparatus used by these workers for those studies has since been applied to a host of other problems by numerous scientists. Rich is a magnificant teacher, with a knack for getting down to crucial issues and explaining them in simple language. A rather unique teaching skill has been his ability to stimulate biochemists to think in purely biologic terms; for example, Charlie Heidelberger was moved to the point of doing tissue culture cloning experiments as a result of having read Rich Prehn's clonal selection theory of chemical carcinogenesis (J Natl Cancer Inst 32:1-17, 1964). In my opinion, the final word is not yet in on the applicability of that theory to one or another of the steps in chemical oncogenesis; it may yet prove to be of great significance. Rich's life has been tied up with sailboats, with inbred mice, and with his lovely Finnish wife, Liisa. In sailing their Chinese Junk into Bar Harbor, he has finally brought together all three passions. In his new role as the director of The Jackson Laboratory, we look forward to a major renaissance of that great institution. According to Rich, the challenge of the future in multicellular biology is to learn more about how cells interact with one another. Once again, Prehn is on the right track. But in 10 years, will he be warning us about excessive enthusiasm in that direction? It is indeed a special pleasure and high honor for me to present to Richmond Prehn, on behalf of the American Association of Pathologists, the second Rous-Whipple Award. He now joins Jacob Furth in that very select club of distinguished experimental pathologists. George M. Martin, MD
