Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11313006›Full record

ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2001

The immunology of Epstein-Barr virus infection.

D J Moss, S R Burrows, S L Silins, I Misko, R Khanna

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2001. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Expansion and Adoptive Transfer of Human Vδ2Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2019
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The virus-immunity ecosystem.Archives of virology. Supplementum · 2005
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

D J MossInfectious Disease and Immunology Division, Queensland Institute of Medical Research and Joint Oncology Program, University of Queensland, Bancroft Centre, Herston, Queensland 4029, Australia. denism@qimr.edu.au
S R Burrows
S L Silins
I Misko
R Khanna

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Epstein-Barr virus is a classic example of a persistent human virus that has caught the imagination of immunologists, virologists and oncologists because of the juxtaposition of a number of important properties. First, the ability of the virus to immortalize B lymphocytes in vitro has provided an antigen presenting cell in which all the latent antigens of the virus are displayed and are available for systematic study. Second, the virus presents an ideal system for studying the immune parameters that maintain latency and the consequences of disturbing this cell-virus relationship. Third, this wealth of immunological background has provided a platform for elucidating the role of the immune system in protection from viral-associated malignancies of B cell and epithelial cell origin. Finally, attention is now being directed towards the development of vaccine formulations which might have broad application in the control of human malignancies.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntigens, ViralEpstein-Barr Virus InfectionsEpstein-Barr Virus Nuclear AntigensGenetic VariationHerpesvirus 4, HumanHumansImmunotherapyReceptors, Antigen, T-CellT-Lymphocytes, CytotoxicAntigens, ViralEpstein-Barr Virus Nuclear AntigensReceptors, Antigen, T-Cell

Identifiers

PMID11313006
PMCPMC1088439

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.