Evidence map›Paper›PMID 14638786›Full record

ArticleInfection and immunity2003

A humoral immune response confers protection against Haemophilus ducreyi infection.

Leah E Cole, Kristen L Toffer, Robert A Fulcher, Lani R San Mateo, Paul E Orndorff, Thomas H Kawula

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infection and immunity, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Molecular pathogenesis ofMicrobiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2025
    Review
  2. Pirates of the haemoglobin.Microbial cell (Graz, Austria) · 2022
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Leah E ColeDepartment of Microbiology and Immunology, University of North Carolina School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599, USA.
Kristen L Toffer
Robert A Fulcher
Lani R San Mateo
Paul E Orndorff
Thomas H Kawula
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USNorth Carolina State University · US

Funding

Training in Sexually Transmitted Infections and HIVT32AI007001 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI SENA-SOBERANO, ARLENE C. · 1985 to 2025
$10.9M
THE MOLECULAR BASIS OF HAEMOPHILUS DUCREYI PATHOGENESISR01AI042824 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KAWULA, THOMAS H · 1998 to 2001
$455k
SECRETED SOD AND HAEMOPHILUS DUCREYI PATHOGENESISF31AI009565 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI SAN MATEO, LANI R · 1995 to 1998
–
NIAID NIH HHS 1 F31 AI09565-01NIAID NIH HHS 5-T32 AI07001NIAID NIH HHS AI42824NIAID NIH HHS F31 AI009565NIAID NIH HHS T32 AI007001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Haemophilus ducreyi is the etiologic agent of the sexually transmitted genital ulcer disease chancroid. Neither naturally occurring chancroid nor experimental infection with H. ducreyi results in protective immunity. Likewise, a single inoculation of H. ducreyi does not protect pigs against subsequent infection. Accordingly, we used the swine model of chancroid infection to examine the impact of multiple inoculations on a host's immune response. After three successive inoculations with H. ducreyi, pigs developed a modestly protective immune response evidenced by the decreased recovery of viable bacteria from lesions. All lesions biopsied 2 days after the first and second inoculations contained viable H. ducreyi cells, yet only 55% of the lesions biopsied 2 days after the third inoculation did. Nearly 90% of the lesions biopsied 7 days after the first inoculation contained viable H. ducreyi cells, but this percentage dropped to only 16% after the third inoculation. Between the first and third inoculations, the average recovery of CFU from lesions decreased approximately 100-fold. The reduced recovery of bacteria corresponded directly with a fivefold increase in H. ducreyi-specific antibody titers and the emergence of bactericidal activity. These immune sera were protective when administered to naïve pigs prior to challenge with H. ducreyi. These data suggest that pigs mount an effective humoral immune response to H. ducreyi after multiple exposures to the organism.

Indexed as

AnimalsAntibodies, BacterialAntibody SpecificityChancroidColony Count, MicrobialDisease Models, AnimalFemaleHaemophilus ducreyiHaemophilus VaccinesHumansImmune SeraImmunization, PassiveImmunoglobulin GSwineSwine DiseasesVaccinationAntibodies, BacterialHaemophilus VaccinesImmune SeraImmunoglobulin G

Identifiers

PMID14638786
PMCPMC308944
OpenAlexW2110322016

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.