Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16113332›Full record

ArticleInfection and immunity2005

Anamnestic responses of mice following Mycobacterium tuberculosis infection.

Arati B Kamath, Samuel M Behar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infection and immunity, 2005. 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. Review
  2. iScience · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Immunology ofMicrobiology spectrum · 2019
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. 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

2 authors.

Arati B KamathDivision of Rheumatology, Immunology and Allergy, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Smith Building Room 516C, One Jimmy Fund Way, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Samuel M Behar

Funding

NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL645450
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The anamnestic response is the property of the immune system that makes vaccine development possible. Although the development of a vaccine against Mycobacterium tuberculosis is an important global priority, there are many gaps in our understanding of how immunological memory develops following M. tuberculosis infection or after BCG vaccination. In experiments designed to compare the anamnestic response of susceptible and resistant mouse strains, major histocompatibility complex-matched memory-immune C3.SW-H2(b)/SnJ and C57BL/6 mice both demonstrated better control of bacterial replication following reinfection with M. tuberculosis than control mice. Nevertheless, this memory response did not appear to have any long-term protective effect for either mouse strain. A greater understanding of the immunological factors that govern the maintenance of immunological memory following exposure to M. tuberculosis will be required to develop an effective vaccine.

Indexed as

AnimalsBronchoalveolar Lavage FluidFemaleGranulomaImmunologic MemoryLymphocyte ActivationMiceMice, Inbred C57BLMycobacterium tuberculosisT-LymphocytesTuberculosis, Pulmonary

Identifiers

PMID16113332
PMCPMC1231147

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.